Demographics details for Big bear lake, CA vs Cuyahoga falls, OH

Population Overview

Compare main population characteristics in Big bear lake, CA vs Cuyahoga falls, OH.

Data Big bear lake Cuyahoga falls
Population 5,031 50,655
Median Age 47.5 years 37.8 years
Median Income $70,020 $67,922
Married Families 42.0% 41.0%
Poverty Level 10% 7%
Unemployment Rate 5.0 4.8

Population Comparison: Big bear lake vs Cuyahoga falls

  • The population in Cuyahoga falls is higher at 50,655, compared to 5,031 in Big bear lake.
  • Residents in Big bear lake have a higher median age of 47.5 years compared to 37.8 years in Cuyahoga falls.
  • Big bear lake has a higher median income of $70,020 compared to $67,922 in Cuyahoga falls.
  • A higher percentage of married families is found in Big bear lake at 42.0% compared to 41.0% in Cuyahoga falls.
  • Big bear lake has a higher poverty level at 10% compared to 7% in Cuyahoga falls.
  • The unemployment rate in Big bear lake is higher at 5.0%, compared to 4.8% in Cuyahoga falls.

Demographics

Demographics Big bear lake vs Cuyahoga falls provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.

Demographic Big bear lake Cuyahoga falls
Black Data is updating 5
White 50 81
Asian 3 6
Hispanic 30 3
Two or More Races 16 5
American Indian 1 Data is updating

Demographics Comparison: Big bear lake vs Cuyahoga falls

  • In Cuyahoga falls, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 5% compared to 0% in Big bear lake.
  • The percentage of White residents is higher in Cuyahoga falls at 81% compared to 50% in Big bear lake.
  • In Cuyahoga falls, the Asian population stands at 6%, greater than 3% in Big bear lake.
  • The Hispanic community is larger in Big bear lake at 30% compared to 3% in Cuyahoga falls.
  • More residents identify as two or more races in Big bear lake at 16% compared to 5% in Cuyahoga falls.
  • A greater percentage of American Indian residents live in Big bear lake at 1% compared to 0% in Cuyahoga falls.

Health Statistics

The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.

Health Metric Big bear lake Cuyahoga falls
Mental Health Not Good 17.4% 17.1%
Physical Health Not Good 12.1% 11.1%
Depression 20.5% 25.1%
Smoking 14.1% 18.5%
Binge Drinking 17.0% 18.8%
Obesity 37.0% 41.1%
Disability Percentage 9.0% 13.0%

Health Statistics Comparison: Big bear lake vs Cuyahoga falls

  • More residents in Big bear lake report poor mental health at 17.4% compared to 17.1% in Cuyahoga falls.
  • Higher depression rates are seen in Cuyahoga falls at 25.1% versus 20.5% in Big bear lake.
  • Cuyahoga falls has a higher smoking rate at 18.5% compared to 14.1% in Big bear lake.
  • More residents engage in binge drinking in Cuyahoga falls at 18.8% compared to 17.0% in Big bear lake.
  • Cuyahoga falls has higher obesity rates at 41.1% compared to 37.0% in Big bear lake.
  • There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Cuyahoga falls at 13.0% compared to 9.0% in Big bear lake.

Education Levels

The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.

Education Level Big bear lake Cuyahoga falls
No Schooling 0.7% (37) 1.6% (825)
High School Diploma 16.4% (825) 19.4% (9,813)
Less than High School 12.6% (634) 6.3% (3,197)
Bachelor's Degree and Higher 25.7% (1,294) 26.1% (13,215)

Education Levels Comparison: Big bear lake vs Cuyahoga falls

  • In Cuyahoga falls, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 1.6% compared to 0.7% in Big bear lake.
  • In Cuyahoga falls, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 19.4% compared to 16.4% in Big bear lake.
  • More residents in Big bear lake have less than a high school education at 12.6% compared to 6.3% in Cuyahoga falls.
  • In Cuyahoga falls, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 26.1% compared to 25.7% in Big bear lake.

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.