Immigrants from China vs Immigrants from Guatemala Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 341,371,533 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Guatemala within Immigrant from China communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.088. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from China within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.002% in Immigrants from Guatemala. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from China corresponds to a decrease of 2.2 Immigrants from Guatemala.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($119,756 compared to $81,341, a difference of 47.2%), median male earnings ($67,353 compared to $46,244, a difference of 45.7%), and per capita income ($54,264 compared to $37,550, a difference of 44.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($57,931 compared to $51,447, a difference of 12.6%), wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 22.5%, a difference of 18.8%), and householder income over 65 years ($69,174 compared to $53,950, a difference of 28.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in child poverty among girls under 16 (13.4% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 62.9%), child poverty under the age of 16 (13.3% compared to 21.6%, a difference of 62.8%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (13.6% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 62.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.2% compared to 20.9%, a difference of 3.4%), single father poverty (14.9% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 11.2%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (13.2% compared to 15.1%, a difference of 13.8%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.2% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 38.8%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 29.5%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.7% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 22.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.4% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 0.95%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.1% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 3.9%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.6% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 4.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.1% compared to 35.3%, a difference of 13.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.1% compared to 75.3%, a difference of 6.0%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 81.1%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (65.4% compared to 65.6%, a difference of 0.39%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.6% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 1.2%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.7% compared to 78.7%, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.8% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 62.1%), single mother households (5.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 52.8%), and births to unmarried women (24.7% compared to 37.5%, a difference of 51.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.7% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 0.53%), family households with children (27.4% compared to 28.8%, a difference of 5.0%), and average family size (3.23 compared to 3.41, a difference of 5.6%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 35.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 13.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 8.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 53.5%, a difference of 3.8%), 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 88.9%, a difference of 4.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 8.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (3.1% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 122.3%), professional degree (6.7% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 95.4%), and master's degree (21.2% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 82.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.5% compared to 96.4%, a difference of 1.1%), kindergarten (97.4% compared to 96.4%, a difference of 1.1%), and 1st grade (97.4% compared to 96.4%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Guatemala communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (8.7% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 33.6%), vision disability (1.8% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 29.2%), and disability age under 5 (0.96% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 27.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.9% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 4.9%), disability age over 75 (46.3% compared to 49.1%, a difference of 6.0%), and hearing disability (2.6% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 6.2%).