Danish vs Chinese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Danish
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Chinese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Danes

Chinese

Excellent
Exceptional
8,781
SOCIAL INDEX
85.3/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
48th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chinese Integration in Danish Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 63,526,674 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Danish communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.534. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Danes within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.135% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Danes corresponds to an increase of 134.6 Chinese.
Danish Integration in Chinese Communities

Danish vs Chinese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($63,117 compared to $77,465, a difference of 22.7%), wage/income gap (31.0% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 19.5%), and median household income ($87,676 compared to $98,496, a difference of 12.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($56,246 compared to $56,872, a difference of 1.1%), per capita income ($44,095 compared to $46,098, a difference of 4.5%), and median earnings ($46,392 compared to $48,836, a difference of 5.3%).
Danish vs Chinese Income
Income MetricDanishChinese
Per Capita Income
Good
$44,095
Exceptional
$46,098
Median Family Income
Excellent
$105,900
Exceptional
$116,188
Median Household Income
Excellent
$87,676
Exceptional
$98,496
Median Earnings
Average
$46,392
Exceptional
$48,836
Median Male Earnings
Excellent
$56,246
Exceptional
$56,872
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$37,730
Exceptional
$41,461
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Excellent
$53,041
Exceptional
$58,162
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Excellent
$97,221
Exceptional
$104,264
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$105,619
Exceptional
$116,156
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$63,117
Exceptional
$77,465
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
31.0%
Average
25.9%

Danish vs Chinese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single female poverty (20.7% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 28.1%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.8% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 22.7%), and single male poverty (12.8% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 16.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.8% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 2.5%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (8.8% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 5.7%), and receiving food stamps (9.0% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 8.1%).
Danish vs Chinese Poverty
Poverty MetricDanishChinese
Poverty
Exceptional
10.7%
Exceptional
9.5%
Families
Exceptional
7.3%
Exceptional
6.5%
Males
Exceptional
9.7%
Exceptional
8.7%
Females
Exceptional
11.7%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Good
19.8%
Exceptional
16.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.8%
Exceptional
11.0%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
14.9%
Exceptional
13.1%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.4%
Exceptional
11.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.6%
Exceptional
11.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.7%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Males
Average
12.8%
Exceptional
11.0%
Single Females
Good
20.7%
Exceptional
16.1%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
15.8%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Mothers
Excellent
28.5%
Exceptional
24.6%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.1%
Exceptional
3.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
8.8%
Exceptional
8.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.2%
Exceptional
9.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.0%
Exceptional
9.8%

Danish vs Chinese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.7% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 63.8%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.2% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 16.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.9% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 16.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.0% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 0.73%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.3% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 0.96%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (3.9% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 1.8%).
Danish vs Chinese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricDanishChinese
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Exceptional
4.5%
Exceptional
4.9%
Females
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.5%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.3%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
15.2%
Exceptional
16.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.3%
Exceptional
9.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.0%
Exceptional
6.1%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.1%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
3.9%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
9.7%
Exceptional
5.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
7.1%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.1%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.5%
Exceptional
4.9%

Danish vs Chinese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (44.7% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 15.8%), in labor force | age 20-24 (79.0% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.3% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 1.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.8% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 0.53%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.3% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.89%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.3% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 0.91%).
Danish vs Chinese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricDanishChinese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Good
65.3%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
79.9%
Exceptional
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
44.7%
Exceptional
38.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
79.0%
Exceptional
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Good
84.8%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
84.3%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Fair
84.3%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.3%
Exceptional
84.1%

Danish vs Chinese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.3% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 18.7%), family households with children (28.7% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 10.5%), and single mother households (5.5% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 7.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (51.1% compared to 50.4%, a difference of 1.4%), currently married (50.5% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 1.9%), and family households (66.0% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 3.2%).
Danish vs Chinese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricDanishChinese
Family Households
Exceptional
66.0%
Exceptional
68.1%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.7%
Tragic
26.0%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
51.1%
Exceptional
50.4%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.17
Exceptional
3.34
Single Father Households
Average
2.3%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.5%
Exceptional
5.2%
Currently Married
Exceptional
50.5%
Exceptional
49.5%
Divorced or Separated
Excellent
11.9%
Exceptional
11.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
28.7%
Excellent
30.2%

Danish vs Chinese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 24.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (63.3% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 5.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (24.7% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 3.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (93.5% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 1.8%), 4 or more vehicles in household (8.6% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 3.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (24.7% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 3.6%).
Danish vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricDanishChinese
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
6.6%
Exceptional
8.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
93.5%
Exceptional
91.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
63.3%
Exceptional
60.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
24.7%
Exceptional
23.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
8.8%

Danish vs Chinese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.9% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 7.8%), associate's degree (47.4% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 2.4%), and professional degree (4.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 2.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.6% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.060%), kindergarten (98.6% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.060%), and 2nd grade (98.5% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.060%).
Danish vs Chinese Education Level
Education Level MetricDanishChinese
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.5%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.6%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.6%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.6%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.4%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.2%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.5%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.7%
Exceptional
95.5%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.7%
Exceptional
94.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.5%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
91.8%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.4%
Exceptional
89.0%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.5%
Exceptional
68.3%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
61.7%
Exceptional
62.2%
Associate's Degree
Good
47.4%
Exceptional
48.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Average
38.1%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Fair
14.5%
Fair
14.6%
Professional Degree
Average
4.4%
Average
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Good
1.9%
Fair
1.8%

Danish vs Chinese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Danish and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.5% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 29.4%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.7% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 20.8%), and disability age 18 to 34 (7.5% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 18.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male disability (11.9% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 1.1%), vision disability (2.1% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 1.3%), and disability (12.0% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 1.7%).
Danish vs Chinese Disability
Disability MetricDanishChinese
Disability
Tragic
12.0%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
11.9%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Good
12.1%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Fair
5.7%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.5%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Fair
11.4%
Exceptional
10.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
22.8%
Exceptional
21.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.2%
Tragic
48.7%
Vision
Exceptional
2.1%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
3.6%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
15.9%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.8%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Tragic
2.6%