Malaysian vs Latvian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Malaysian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Latvian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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

Malaysians

Latvians

Fair
Exceptional
3,136
SOCIAL INDEX
28.9/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
232nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,576
SOCIAL INDEX
93.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
12th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Latvian Integration in Malaysian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 132,300,532 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Latvians within Malaysian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.673. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Malaysians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.147% in Latvians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Malaysians corresponds to an increase of 146.7 Latvians.
Malaysian Integration in Latvian Communities

Malaysian vs Latvian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($39,194 compared to $52,649, a difference of 34.3%), median family income ($95,230 compared to $120,301, a difference of 26.3%), and median male earnings ($50,772 compared to $63,498, a difference of 25.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($51,615 compared to $52,783, a difference of 2.3%), wage/income gap (25.0% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 11.3%), and householder income over 65 years ($58,244 compared to $67,326, a difference of 15.6%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Income
Income MetricMalaysianLatvian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$39,194
Exceptional
$52,649
Median Family Income
Tragic
$95,230
Exceptional
$120,301
Median Household Income
Tragic
$81,064
Exceptional
$97,311
Median Earnings
Tragic
$43,844
Exceptional
$53,001
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$50,772
Exceptional
$63,498
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$37,298
Exceptional
$43,941
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Poor
$51,615
Excellent
$52,783
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$88,291
Exceptional
$108,926
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$94,517
Exceptional
$115,957
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$58,244
Exceptional
$67,326
Wage/Income Gap
Excellent
25.0%
Tragic
27.9%

Malaysian vs Latvian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (12.7% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 39.4%), married-couple family poverty (5.4% compared to 3.9%, a difference of 37.2%), and family poverty (9.6% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 36.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (12.6% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 0.45%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.9% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 2.0%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.8% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 8.8%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Poverty
Poverty MetricMalaysianLatvian
Poverty
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
10.5%
Families
Poor
9.6%
Exceptional
7.1%
Males
Tragic
12.0%
Exceptional
9.6%
Females
Tragic
14.3%
Exceptional
11.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Good
19.9%
Exceptional
19.5%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
11.8%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
18.4%
Exceptional
14.5%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
17.5%
Exceptional
13.2%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
17.6%
Exceptional
13.4%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
17.8%
Exceptional
13.5%
Single Males
Good
12.6%
Good
12.7%
Single Females
Tragic
22.2%
Exceptional
19.0%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
14.9%
Fair
16.5%
Single Mothers
Poor
29.7%
Exceptional
26.9%
Married Couples
Fair
5.4%
Exceptional
3.9%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.8%
Exceptional
9.5%
Seniors Over 75 years
Excellent
11.8%
Exceptional
10.8%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
12.7%
Exceptional
9.1%

Malaysian vs Latvian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.7% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 14.5%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.7% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 13.3%), and female unemployment (5.3% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 13.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.7% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 0.36%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 0.61%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.8% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 1.3%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricMalaysianLatvian
Unemployment
Average
5.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Fair
5.3%
Exceptional
4.8%
Females
Average
5.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Youth < 25
Excellent
11.4%
Exceptional
11.0%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
17.0%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.8%
Exceptional
9.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Good
6.6%
Exceptional
6.2%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Average
5.5%
Exceptional
5.0%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Fair
4.7%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Average
4.5%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Good
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.2%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Poor
8.9%
Excellent
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 6
Fair
7.7%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Fair
5.5%
Exceptional
4.9%

Malaysian vs Latvian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 30-34 (84.1% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 2.3%), in labor force | age 16-19 (39.7% compared to 38.9%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (82.0% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 2.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (66.1% compared to 65.5%, a difference of 0.91%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.5% compared to 80.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (77.2% compared to 76.1%, a difference of 1.5%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricMalaysianLatvian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.1%
Excellent
65.5%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Fair
79.5%
Exceptional
80.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
39.7%
Exceptional
38.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.2%
Exceptional
76.1%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Average
84.6%
Exceptional
86.1%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
84.1%
Exceptional
86.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
85.4%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
82.0%
Exceptional
83.8%

Malaysian vs Latvian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 38.3%), single father households (2.7% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 36.1%), and births to unmarried women (33.9% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 22.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (46.3% compared to 47.9%, a difference of 3.4%), family households (65.9% compared to 62.8%, a difference of 5.0%), and currently married (45.9% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 5.6%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricMalaysianLatvian
Family Households
Exceptional
65.9%
Tragic
62.8%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
29.8%
Tragic
26.4%
Married-couple Households
Average
46.3%
Exceptional
47.9%
Average Family Size
Exceptional
3.31
Tragic
3.11
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.7%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.3%
Exceptional
5.3%
Currently Married
Poor
45.9%
Exceptional
48.5%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
12.4%
Exceptional
11.6%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
33.9%
Exceptional
27.7%

Malaysian vs Latvian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.7% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 27.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.7% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 25.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.6% compared to 19.3%, a difference of 17.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 90.3%, a difference of 2.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.8% compared to 56.2%, a difference of 6.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.6% compared to 19.3%, a difference of 17.3%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricMalaysianLatvian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.7%
Excellent
9.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Excellent
90.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.8%
Excellent
56.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.6%
Fair
19.3%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.7%
Fair
6.1%

Malaysian vs Latvian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 84.0%), no schooling completed (2.8% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 79.4%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 77.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.3% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.3%), kindergarten (97.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and 1st grade (97.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 1.3%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Education Level
Education Level MetricMalaysianLatvian
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.8%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
Kindergarten
Tragic
97.2%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Tragic
97.2%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Tragic
97.1%
Exceptional
98.4%
3rd Grade
Tragic
97.0%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Tragic
96.7%
Exceptional
98.2%
5th Grade
Tragic
96.5%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.2%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Tragic
94.8%
Exceptional
97.2%
8th Grade
Tragic
94.5%
Exceptional
97.0%
9th Grade
Tragic
93.5%
Exceptional
96.4%
10th Grade
Tragic
92.2%
Exceptional
95.6%
11th Grade
Tragic
90.8%
Exceptional
94.7%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
89.2%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Tragic
87.0%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.3%
Exceptional
89.2%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
62.2%
Exceptional
71.6%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
55.6%
Exceptional
66.1%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
41.6%
Exceptional
53.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
32.9%
Exceptional
46.1%
Master's Degree
Tragic
12.0%
Exceptional
19.8%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
6.2%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
2.6%

Malaysian vs Latvian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Malaysian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (12.5% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 22.7%), disability age 65 to 74 (25.4% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 19.7%), and vision disability (2.3% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 17.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of hearing disability (3.2% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 0.62%), disability age under 5 (1.3% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 1.5%), and disability age 18 to 34 (7.2% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 4.8%).
Malaysian vs Latvian Disability
Disability MetricMalaysianLatvian
Disability
Tragic
12.2%
Excellent
11.4%
Males
Tragic
11.8%
Good
11.1%
Females
Tragic
12.5%
Exceptional
11.7%
Age | Under 5 years
Poor
1.3%
Tragic
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
5.4%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.2%
Poor
6.8%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
12.5%
Exceptional
10.2%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
25.4%
Exceptional
21.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
49.0%
Exceptional
45.1%
Vision
Tragic
2.3%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
3.2%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.9%
Exceptional
16.6%
Ambulatory
Fair
6.2%
Exceptional
5.7%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.5%
Exceptional
2.3%