Demographics details for Ash fork, AZ vs Marshall, AR
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Ash fork, AZ vs Marshall, AR.
| Data | Ash fork | Marshall |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 466 | 1,339 |
| Median Age | 38.6 years | 52.3 years |
| Median Income | $79,861 | $28,290 |
| Married Families | 50.0% | 33.0% |
| Poverty Level | 10% | 16% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.1 | 4.2 |
Population Comparison: Ash fork vs Marshall
- The population in Marshall is higher at 1,339, compared to 466 in Ash fork.
- The median age in Marshall is higher at 52.3 years, compared to 38.6 years in Ash fork.
- Ash fork has a higher median income of $79,861 compared to $28,290 in Marshall.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Ash fork at 50.0% compared to 33.0% in Marshall.
- The poverty level is higher in Marshall at 16%, compared to 10% in Ash fork.
- Marshall has a higher unemployment rate at 4.2% compared to 4.1% in Ash fork.
Demographics
Demographics Ash fork vs Marshall provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Ash fork | Marshall |
|---|---|---|
| Black | Data is updating | Data is updating |
| White | 79 | 84 |
| Asian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
| Hispanic | 6 | 3 |
| Two or More Races | 15 | 12 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | 1 |
Demographics Comparison: Ash fork vs Marshall
- The percentage of Black residents is the same in both Ash fork and Marshall at 0%.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Marshall at 84% compared to 79% in Ash fork.
- Both Ash fork and Marshall have the same percentage of Asian residents at 0%.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Ash fork at 6% compared to 3% in Marshall.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Ash fork at 15% compared to 12% in Marshall.
- In Marshall, the percentage of American Indian residents is higher at 1%, compared to 0% in Ash fork.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Ash fork | Marshall |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 18.4% | 21.7% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 13.2% | 16.2% |
| Depression | 21.4% | 29.8% |
| Smoking | 19.3% | 27.2% |
| Binge Drinking | 15.9% | 14.7% |
| Obesity | 30.6% | 39.2% |
| Disability Percentage | 26.0% | 30.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Ash fork vs Marshall
- In Marshall, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 21.7% compared to 18.4% in Ash fork.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Marshall at 29.8% versus 21.4% in Ash fork.
- Marshall has a higher smoking rate at 27.2% compared to 19.3% in Ash fork.
- Binge drinking is more common in Ash fork at 15.9% compared to 14.7% in Marshall.
- Marshall has higher obesity rates at 39.2% compared to 30.6% in Ash fork.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Marshall at 30.0% compared to 26.0% in Ash fork.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Ash fork | Marshall |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.0% (Data is updating) | 0.9% (12) |
| High School Diploma | 13.1% (61) | 27.9% (373) |
| Less than High School | 23.6% (110) | 32.4% (434) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 8.8% (41) | 11.7% (156) |
Education Levels Comparison: Ash fork vs Marshall
- In Marshall, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 0.9% compared to 0.0% in Ash fork.
- In Marshall, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 27.9% compared to 13.1% in Ash fork.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Marshall at 32.4%, compared to 23.6% in Ash fork.
- In Marshall, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 11.7% compared to 8.8% in Ash fork.
Crime and Safety
Understanding crime rates and safety measures is crucial for assessing the livability of a city or town. Crime levels can vary significantly from one neighborhood to another, influenced by various factors such as population density and local amenities. For instance, areas with high foot traffic, like train stations, might experience different crime dynamics compared to quieter residential neighborhoods. Evaluating these patterns helps in making informed decisions about safety and community well-being.