Lithuanian vs Samoan Community Comparison

COMPARE

Lithuanian
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 SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranScandinavianScotch-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
Samoan
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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

Lithuanians

Samoans

Excellent
Fair
8,827
SOCIAL INDEX
85.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
46th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
4,237
SOCIAL INDEX
39.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
202nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Samoan Integration in Lithuanian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 194,583,496 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Samoans within Lithuanian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.318. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Lithuanians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.036% in Samoans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Lithuanians corresponds to an increase of 35.7 Samoans.
Lithuanian Integration in Samoan Communities

Lithuanian vs Samoan Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($49,448 compared to $39,826, a difference of 24.2%), median male earnings ($61,228 compared to $51,389, a difference of 19.2%), and median earnings ($50,991 compared to $44,206, a difference of 15.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($65,209 compared to $65,427, a difference of 0.33%), householder income under 25 years ($53,552 compared to $54,610, a difference of 2.0%), and median household income ($93,852 compared to $86,498, a difference of 8.5%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Income
Income MetricLithuanianSamoan
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$49,448
Tragic
$39,826
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$115,395
Fair
$100,344
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$93,852
Good
$86,498
Median Earnings
Exceptional
$50,991
Tragic
$44,206
Median Male Earnings
Exceptional
$61,228
Tragic
$51,389
Median Female Earnings
Exceptional
$42,108
Tragic
$37,498
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Exceptional
$53,552
Exceptional
$54,610
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$105,223
Fair
$92,385
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Exceptional
$112,484
Good
$101,580
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Exceptional
$65,209
Exceptional
$65,427
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.7%
Fair
26.0%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in single father poverty (17.3% compared to 13.8%, a difference of 25.2%), receiving food stamps (9.7% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 24.8%), and married-couple family poverty (4.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 23.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (18.7% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 2.6%), single mother poverty (27.4% compared to 28.5%, a difference of 3.9%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (10.6% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 5.1%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Poverty
Poverty MetricLithuanianSamoan
Poverty
Exceptional
10.5%
Good
12.0%
Families
Exceptional
7.2%
Good
8.6%
Males
Exceptional
9.5%
Good
10.9%
Females
Exceptional
11.4%
Good
13.1%
Females 18 to 24 years
Exceptional
18.7%
Exceptional
18.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
12.2%
Average
13.5%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
15.2%
Excellent
16.5%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.5%
Good
15.6%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.0%
Excellent
15.7%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
13.9%
Excellent
15.7%
Single Males
Fair
13.0%
Exceptional
11.7%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.2%
Good
20.6%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.3%
Exceptional
13.8%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.4%
Excellent
28.5%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.1%
Exceptional
10.0%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.6%
Exceptional
11.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
9.7%
Fair
12.1%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in female unemployment (4.7% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 14.4%), unemployment (4.8% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 13.9%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 13.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.5% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 0.55%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.2% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 0.95%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.4% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 1.7%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Unemployment
Unemployment MetricLithuanianSamoan
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
5.5%
Males
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.5%
Females
Exceptional
4.7%
Poor
5.4%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.3%
Tragic
11.9%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Excellent
17.2%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Good
10.2%
Average
10.3%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Good
6.5%
Good
6.6%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.4%
Tragic
5.8%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.0%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Average
4.5%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Excellent
4.7%
Average
4.8%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Excellent
4.8%
Average
4.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Fair
5.4%
Tragic
5.5%
Seniors > 65
Average
5.1%
Tragic
5.3%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
9.9%
Tragic
9.1%
Women w/ Children < 6
Fair
7.8%
Tragic
7.9%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
9.4%
Exceptional
8.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.0%
Average
5.4%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (40.4% compared to 39.1%, a difference of 3.3%), in labor force | age 25-29 (85.8% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 3.0%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.6% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 2.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.0% compared to 77.4%, a difference of 0.52%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 65.5%, a difference of 1.1%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.2% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 1.6%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricLithuanianSamoan
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Poor
64.8%
Exceptional
65.5%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.2%
Tragic
79.0%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
40.4%
Exceptional
39.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.0%
Exceptional
77.4%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.8%
Tragic
83.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Exceptional
85.6%
Tragic
83.3%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
85.2%
Tragic
83.2%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.6%
Tragic
81.8%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.1% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 24.3%), single mother households (5.4% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 20.3%), and family households with children (26.6% compared to 29.5%, a difference of 11.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (48.9% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 0.45%), divorced or separated (11.7% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 2.2%), and currently married (49.0% compared to 46.8%, a difference of 4.7%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Family Structure
Family Structure MetricLithuanianSamoan
Family Households
Fair
64.0%
Exceptional
67.9%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
26.6%
Exceptional
29.5%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.9%
Exceptional
48.7%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.10
Exceptional
3.42
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
2.6%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.4%
Fair
6.5%
Currently Married
Exceptional
49.0%
Average
46.8%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.7%
Good
12.0%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.6%
Fair
32.6%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.3% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 45.8%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 24.1%), and no vehicles in household (8.4% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 10.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.7% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 0.80%), 2 or more vehicles in household (58.2% compared to 61.5%, a difference of 5.6%), and no vehicles in household (8.4% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 10.5%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricLithuanianSamoan
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
8.4%
Exceptional
7.6%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
91.7%
Exceptional
92.4%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
58.2%
Exceptional
61.5%
3+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
20.1%
Exceptional
25.0%
4+ Vehicles Available
Average
6.3%
Exceptional
9.2%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.4% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 61.8%), doctorate degree (2.3% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 58.9%), and no schooling completed (1.4% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 57.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.6% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.86%), kindergarten (98.6% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.87%), and 1st grade (98.6% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.88%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Education Level
Education Level MetricLithuanianSamoan
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.4%
Tragic
2.3%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.6%
Tragic
97.8%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.6%
Tragic
97.8%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.6%
Tragic
97.7%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Tragic
97.7%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.5%
Tragic
97.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
97.3%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Tragic
97.1%
6th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Poor
96.8%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.5%
Tragic
95.7%
8th Grade
Exceptional
97.3%
Tragic
95.4%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.6%
Poor
94.6%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.8%
Poor
93.4%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.8%
Fair
92.3%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
93.6%
Fair
90.8%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
92.0%
Poor
88.5%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
88.9%
Poor
84.9%
College, Under 1 year
Exceptional
68.8%
Tragic
63.0%
College, 1 year or more
Exceptional
62.9%
Tragic
56.2%
Associate's Degree
Exceptional
50.6%
Tragic
41.1%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
42.2%
Tragic
31.8%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
17.7%
Tragic
11.5%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.4%
Tragic
3.3%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.3%
Tragic
1.4%

Lithuanian vs Samoan Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Lithuanian and Samoan communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.6% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 29.5%), disability age 65 to 74 (21.4% compared to 25.4%, a difference of 19.0%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.8% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 11.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 18 to 34 (7.0% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 0.41%), hearing disability (3.4% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 1.2%), and female disability (12.2% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 2.1%).
Lithuanian vs Samoan Disability
Disability MetricLithuanianSamoan
Disability
Poor
11.9%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
11.6%
Tragic
11.9%
Females
Average
12.2%
Poor
12.4%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.6%
Good
1.2%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
5.8%
Excellent
5.5%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.0%
Tragic
7.0%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Excellent
10.8%
Tragic
12.1%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
21.4%
Tragic
25.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
45.1%
Tragic
49.5%
Vision
Exceptional
2.0%
Poor
2.2%
Hearing
Tragic
3.4%
Tragic
3.3%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.3%
Tragic
17.9%
Ambulatory
Excellent
6.0%
Poor
6.3%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.4%
Tragic
2.6%