Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Community Comparison

COMPARE

Immigrants from China
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAmericanApacheArabArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYup'ik
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
Zimbabwean
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch 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 AmericaChileColombiaCongoCosta 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

Immigrants from China

Zimbabweans

Good
Exceptional
7,289
SOCIAL INDEX
70.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
125th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,358
SOCIAL INDEX
91.0/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
18th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Zimbabwean Integration in Immigrants from China Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 68,324,970 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans within Immigrant from China communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.003. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from China within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.000% in Zimbabweans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from China corresponds to a decrease of 0.0 Zimbabweans.
Immigrants from China Integration in Zimbabwean Communities

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($119,756 compared to $98,586, a difference of 21.5%), median male earnings ($67,353 compared to $56,302, a difference of 19.6%), and per capita income ($54,264 compared to $45,804, a difference of 18.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 1.4%), householder income over 65 years ($69,174 compared to $65,854, a difference of 5.0%), and householder income under 25 years ($57,931 compared to $51,259, a difference of 13.0%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Income
Income MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$54,264
Exceptional
$45,804
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$125,540
Exceptional
$110,011
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$105,335
Exceptional
$90,618
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$56,638
Exceptional
$48,229
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$67,353
Excellent
$56,302
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$46,972
Exceptional
$40,798
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$57,931
Tragic
$51,259
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$119,756
Exceptional
$98,586
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$122,178
Exceptional
$106,849
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$69,174
Exceptional
$65,854
Wage/Income Gap
Poor
26.7%
Fair
26.3%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.0% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 21.6%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.5% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 19.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (13.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 18.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family poverty (7.8% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 0.48%), receiving food stamps (9.6% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 0.86%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.2% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 1.3%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Poverty
Poverty MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
Poverty
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
11.3%
Families
Exceptional
7.8%
Exceptional
7.8%
Males
Excellent
10.7%
Exceptional
10.2%
Females
Exceptional
12.5%
Exceptional
12.3%
Females 18 to 24 years
Average
20.2%
Fair
20.4%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
11.7%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
13.6%
Exceptional
15.2%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.3%
Exceptional
14.2%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.6%
Exceptional
14.3%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.4%
Exceptional
14.4%
Single Males
Exceptional
11.4%
Poor
13.1%
Single Females
Exceptional
18.1%
Exceptional
19.5%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
14.9%
Exceptional
15.6%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
26.1%
Exceptional
27.9%
Married Couples
Excellent
5.0%
Exceptional
4.1%
Seniors Over 65 years
Tragic
11.5%
Exceptional
9.6%
Seniors Over 75 years
Tragic
13.2%
Exceptional
11.2%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.6%
Exceptional
9.5%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.2% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 18.0%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.0% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 17.5%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.6% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 13.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 1.9%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.2% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 2.1%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 4.5%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Unemployment
Unemployment MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
Unemployment
Good
5.2%
Exceptional
4.8%
Males
Good
5.2%
Exceptional
4.8%
Females
Good
5.2%
Exceptional
4.8%
Youth < 25
Average
11.6%
Exceptional
10.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Good
17.5%
Exceptional
15.4%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Fair
10.4%
Exceptional
9.2%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.2%
Exceptional
6.4%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
4.8%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Average
4.5%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
5.0%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Tragic
5.1%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Fair
5.4%
Tragic
5.9%
Seniors > 65
Poor
5.2%
Tragic
5.6%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.8%
Average
8.7%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.2%
Exceptional
7.3%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
7.7%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
5.1%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.1% compared to 38.7%, a difference of 24.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.1% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 6.4%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.4% compared to 67.3%, a difference of 2.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.6% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 0.14%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.4% compared to 85.6%, a difference of 0.32%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 1.0%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Excellent
65.4%
Exceptional
67.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Good
79.7%
Exceptional
81.0%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
31.1%
Exceptional
38.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Tragic
71.1%
Excellent
75.6%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Average
84.6%
Fair
84.5%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.4%
Exceptional
85.6%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
84.7%
Exceptional
86.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.2%
Exceptional
84.0%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.1% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 19.8%), single father households (1.8% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 19.8%), and births to unmarried women (24.7% compared to 28.7%, a difference of 16.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.23 compared to 3.20, a difference of 0.89%), family households (64.7% compared to 64.1%, a difference of 1.0%), and family households with children (27.4% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 1.7%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Family Structure
Family Structure MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
Family Households
Excellent
64.7%
Fair
64.1%
Family Households with Children
Average
27.4%
Exceptional
27.9%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.4%
Excellent
47.4%
Average Family Size
Average
3.23
Poor
3.20
Single Father Households
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.1%
Excellent
6.1%
Currently Married
Exceptional
47.9%
Good
47.0%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
10.0%
Exceptional
11.6%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
24.7%
Exceptional
28.7%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 67.7%), 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 11.2%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 11.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 6.8%), 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 91.0%, a difference of 7.1%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 11.2%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
9.0%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
84.9%
Exceptional
91.0%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
51.5%
Exceptional
57.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
18.2%
Excellent
20.3%
4+ Vehicles Available
Poor
6.0%
Good
6.4%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.6% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 48.3%), doctorate degree (3.1% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 35.9%), and professional degree (6.7% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 29.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.5% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.85%), kindergarten (97.4% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.86%), and 1st grade (97.4% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.88%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Education Level
Education Level MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.6%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Tragic
97.5%
Exceptional
98.3%
Kindergarten
Tragic
97.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
1st Grade
Tragic
97.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
3rd Grade
Tragic
97.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
4th Grade
Tragic
97.0%
Exceptional
97.9%
5th Grade
Tragic
96.8%
Exceptional
97.8%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.4%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Tragic
95.3%
Exceptional
96.8%
8th Grade
Tragic
95.0%
Exceptional
96.5%
9th Grade
Tragic
94.3%
Exceptional
95.9%
10th Grade
Tragic
93.2%
Exceptional
94.9%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
93.9%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Good
91.3%
Exceptional
92.7%
High School Diploma
Good
89.3%
Exceptional
91.1%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
86.9%
Exceptional
88.0%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
70.9%
Exceptional
69.9%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
66.4%
Exceptional
64.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
55.5%
Exceptional
51.3%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
48.4%
Exceptional
43.3%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
21.2%
Exceptional
17.7%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
6.7%
Exceptional
5.2%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
3.1%
Exceptional
2.3%

Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in disability age 5 to 17 (4.5% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 22.7%), disability age under 5 (0.96% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 22.2%), and disability age 35 to 64 (8.7% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 20.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 1.6%), disability age over 75 (46.3% compared to 48.1%, a difference of 3.7%), and cognitive disability (16.9% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 4.1%).
Immigrants from China vs Zimbabwean Disability
Disability MetricImmigrants from ChinaZimbabwean
Disability
Exceptional
10.1%
Exceptional
10.9%
Males
Exceptional
9.5%
Exceptional
10.6%
Females
Exceptional
10.7%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Exceptional
0.96%
Exceptional
1.2%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.5%
Good
5.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
5.4%
Good
6.5%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
8.7%
Exceptional
10.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
20.3%
Exceptional
21.5%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.3%
Tragic
48.1%
Vision
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.6%
Excellent
2.8%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.9%
Tragic
17.6%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.3%
Exceptional
5.4%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.3%
Exceptional
2.2%