Demographics details for Bigfork, MN vs Siloam springs, AR
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Bigfork, MN vs Siloam springs, AR.
| Data | Bigfork | Siloam springs |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 403 | 18,654 |
| Median Age | 66.3 years | 30.1 years |
| Median Income | $33,750 | $59,911 |
| Married Families | 31.0% | 38.0% |
| Poverty Level | 9% | 13% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.5 | 3.5 |
Population Comparison: Bigfork vs Siloam springs
- The population in Siloam springs is higher at 18,654, compared to 403 in Bigfork.
- Residents in Bigfork have a higher median age of 66.3 years compared to 30.1 years in Siloam springs.
- Siloam springs has a higher median income of $59,911, compared to $33,750 in Bigfork.
- In Siloam springs, the percentage of married families is higher at 38.0%, compared to 31.0% in Bigfork.
- The poverty level is higher in Siloam springs at 13%, compared to 9% in Bigfork.
- The unemployment rate is the same in both Bigfork and Siloam springs at 3.5%.
Demographics
Demographics Bigfork vs Siloam springs provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Bigfork | Siloam springs |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 1 | 1 |
| White | 93 | 50 |
| Asian | Data is updating | 3 |
| Hispanic | 2 | 23 |
| Two or More Races | 1 | 20 |
| American Indian | 3 | 3 |
Demographics Comparison: Bigfork vs Siloam springs
- The percentage of Black residents is the same in both Bigfork and Siloam springs at 1%.
- Bigfork has a higher percentage of White residents at 93% compared to 50% in Siloam springs.
- In Siloam springs, the Asian population stands at 3%, greater than 0% in Bigfork.
- Siloam springs has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 23%, compared to 2% in Bigfork.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Siloam springs at 20%, compared to 1% in Bigfork.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Bigfork and Siloam springs at 3%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Bigfork | Siloam springs |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 16.0% | 20.0% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 10.4% | 15.0% |
| Depression | 24.3% | 26.0% |
| Smoking | 21.9% | 21.6% |
| Binge Drinking | 18.4% | 14.9% |
| Obesity | 41.6% | 39.2% |
| Disability Percentage | 23.0% | 13.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Bigfork vs Siloam springs
- In Siloam springs, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 20.0% compared to 16.0% in Bigfork.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Siloam springs at 26.0% versus 24.3% in Bigfork.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Bigfork at 21.9% compared to 21.6% in Siloam springs.
- Binge drinking is more common in Bigfork at 18.4% compared to 14.9% in Siloam springs.
- Obesity rates are higher in Bigfork at 41.6% compared to 39.2% in Siloam springs.
- Disability percentages are higher in Bigfork at 23.0% compared to 13.0% in Siloam springs.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Bigfork | Siloam springs |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.0% (Data is updating) | 3.7% (681) |
| High School Diploma | 26.6% (107) | 13.5% (2,510) |
| Less than High School | 9.7% (39) | 17.4% (3,249) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 8.2% (33) | 14.4% (2,680) |
Education Levels Comparison: Bigfork vs Siloam springs
- In Siloam springs, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 3.7% compared to 0.0% in Bigfork.
- A higher percentage of residents in Bigfork hold a high school diploma at 26.6% compared to 13.5% in Siloam springs.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Siloam springs at 17.4%, compared to 9.7% in Bigfork.
- In Siloam springs, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 14.4% compared to 8.2% in Bigfork.
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.