Demographics details for Troy, MI vs Sugar land, TX
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Troy, MI vs Sugar land, TX.
| Data | Troy | Sugar land |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 87,201 | 109,414 |
| Median Age | 42.1 years | 42.5 years |
| Median Income | $115,639 | $132,247 |
| Married Families | 48.0% | 52.0% |
| Poverty Level | 6% | 6% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.5 | 4.0 |
Population Comparison: Troy vs Sugar land
- The population in Sugar land is higher at 109,414, compared to 87,201 in Troy.
- The median age in Sugar land is higher at 42.5 years, compared to 42.1 years in Troy.
- Sugar land has a higher median income of $132,247, compared to $115,639 in Troy.
- In Sugar land, the percentage of married families is higher at 52.0%, compared to 48.0% in Troy.
- The poverty level is identical in both Troy and Sugar land at 6%.
- Sugar land has a higher unemployment rate at 4.0% compared to 3.5% in Troy.
Demographics
Demographics Troy vs Sugar land provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Troy | Sugar land |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 4 | 7 |
| White | 63 | 33 |
| Asian | 26 | 39 |
| Hispanic | 3 | 13 |
| Two or More Races | 4 | 8 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Troy vs Sugar land
- In Sugar land, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 7% compared to 4% in Troy.
- Troy has a higher percentage of White residents at 63% compared to 33% in Sugar land.
- In Sugar land, the Asian population stands at 39%, greater than 26% in Troy.
- Sugar land has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 13%, compared to 3% in Troy.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Sugar land at 8%, compared to 4% in Troy.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Troy and Sugar land at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Troy | Sugar land |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 12.5% | 12.5% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 7.2% | 7.4% |
| Depression | 18.3% | 16.9% |
| Smoking | 10.0% | 9.6% |
| Binge Drinking | 17.8% | 16.0% |
| Obesity | 25.7% | 25.0% |
| Disability Percentage | 8.0% | 7.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Troy vs Sugar land
- Poor mental health levels are equal in both Troy and Sugar land at 12.5%.
- Depression is more prevalent in Troy at 18.3% compared to 16.9% in Sugar land.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Troy at 10.0% compared to 9.6% in Sugar land.
- Binge drinking is more common in Troy at 17.8% compared to 16.0% in Sugar land.
- Obesity rates are higher in Troy at 25.7% compared to 25.0% in Sugar land.
- Disability percentages are higher in Troy at 8.0% compared to 7.0% in Sugar land.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Troy | Sugar land |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.9% (767) | 1.2% (1,314) |
| High School Diploma | 8.2% (7,163) | 7.3% (7,972) |
| Less than High School | 4.4% (3,815) | 4.3% (4,753) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 43.4% (37,873) | 42.8% (46,851) |
Education Levels Comparison: Troy vs Sugar land
- In Sugar land, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 1.2% compared to 0.9% in Troy.
- A higher percentage of residents in Troy hold a high school diploma at 8.2% compared to 7.3% in Sugar land.
- More residents in Troy have less than a high school education at 4.4% compared to 4.3% in Sugar land.
- A higher percentage of residents in Troy hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 43.4% compared to 42.8% in Sugar land.
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.