Demographics details for Fort atkinson, WI vs Southfield, MI

Population Overview

Compare main population characteristics in Fort atkinson, WI vs Southfield, MI.

Data Fort atkinson Southfield
Population 12,412 75,431
Median Age 42.0 years 42.1 years
Median Income $72,215 $63,980
Married Families 41.0% 31.0%
Poverty Level 9% 13%
Unemployment Rate 3.2 6.2

Population Comparison: Fort atkinson vs Southfield

  • The population in Southfield is higher at 75,431, compared to 12,412 in Fort atkinson.
  • The median age in Southfield is higher at 42.1 years, compared to 42.0 years in Fort atkinson.
  • Fort atkinson has a higher median income of $72,215 compared to $63,980 in Southfield.
  • A higher percentage of married families is found in Fort atkinson at 41.0% compared to 31.0% in Southfield.
  • The poverty level is higher in Southfield at 13%, compared to 9% in Fort atkinson.
  • Southfield has a higher unemployment rate at 6.2% compared to 3.2% in Fort atkinson.

Demographics

Demographics Fort atkinson vs Southfield provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.

Demographic Fort atkinson Southfield
Black Data is updating 66
White 89 23
Asian Data is updating 2
Hispanic 8 2
Two or More Races 3 7
American Indian Data is updating Data is updating

Demographics Comparison: Fort atkinson vs Southfield

  • In Southfield, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 66% compared to 0% in Fort atkinson.
  • Fort atkinson has a higher percentage of White residents at 89% compared to 23% in Southfield.
  • In Southfield, the Asian population stands at 2%, greater than 0% in Fort atkinson.
  • The Hispanic community is larger in Fort atkinson at 8% compared to 2% in Southfield.
  • The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Southfield at 7%, compared to 3% in Fort atkinson.
  • The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Fort atkinson and Southfield at 0%.

Health Statistics

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

Health Metric Fort atkinson Southfield
Mental Health Not Good 15.2% 15.4%
Physical Health Not Good 10.2% 9.9%
Depression 23.6% 17.6%
Smoking 16.0% 14.8%
Binge Drinking 23.5% 14.9%
Obesity 34.0% 38.1%
Disability Percentage 12.0% 17.0%

Health Statistics Comparison: Fort atkinson vs Southfield

  • In Southfield, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 15.4% compared to 15.2% in Fort atkinson.
  • Depression is more prevalent in Fort atkinson at 23.6% compared to 17.6% in Southfield.
  • Smoking is more prevalent in Fort atkinson at 16.0% compared to 14.8% in Southfield.
  • Binge drinking is more common in Fort atkinson at 23.5% compared to 14.9% in Southfield.
  • Southfield has higher obesity rates at 38.1% compared to 34.0% in Fort atkinson.
  • There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Southfield at 17.0% compared to 12.0% in Fort atkinson.

Education Levels

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

Education Level Fort atkinson Southfield
No Schooling 1.3% (160) 1.2% (870)
High School Diploma 20.8% (2,578) 12.0% (9,038)
Less than High School 12.9% (1,595) 6.1% (4,623)
Bachelor's Degree and Higher 19.6% (2,436) 27.5% (20,760)

Education Levels Comparison: Fort atkinson vs Southfield

  • A higher percentage of residents in Fort atkinson have no formal schooling at 1.3% compared to 1.2% in Southfield.
  • A higher percentage of residents in Fort atkinson hold a high school diploma at 20.8% compared to 12.0% in Southfield.
  • More residents in Fort atkinson have less than a high school education at 12.9% compared to 6.1% in Southfield.
  • In Southfield, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 27.5% compared to 19.6% in Fort atkinson.

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.