The presented pie charts compare Japan and Malaysia citizens in terms of how they distributed their incomes among 5 counterparts in 2010.
Overall, housing, food as well as other goods and services were three categories into which residents channeled most proportions of their budget in both nations. However, discernible differences were witnessed in the figures for each individual item.
Turning into detail, the percentages of housing and transport displayed significant gaps between two regions. Specifically, Malaysian people spent 34% of their budgets on housing, while the rate of Japanese was considerably lower, with 21%. By contrast, expenditure for transport occupied 20% of domestic income in Japan, which was two times higher than a 10-per-cent rate in Malaysia.
Regarding to remaining categories, a gap of 3% between the figures for same items in both countries can be observed. Indeed, with 29% and 6%, respectively, other goods and services, along with healthcare, accounted for higher rates of total income in Japan than they did in Malaysia. Unlike these two sectors, a 24-per-cent number occupied by food in Japan was slightly lower than its value in Malaysia, which was 27%.
- Some people think that everyone has the right to have access to university education, and that governments should make it free for all students no matter what financial background they have.To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion. 89
- The table below shows the number of cars produced in 3 countries between 2003 and 2009. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- Schools are no longer necessary because children can get so much information available through the internet, and they can study just as well at home. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 84
- This table shows the percentage of school aged boys in two different age groups who participated in 5 different sports in the UK in 2010.Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 78
- The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 11
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, regarding, well, while, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1021.0 965.302439024 106% => OK
No of words: 187.0 196.424390244 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.45989304813 4.92477711251 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.69794460899 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90516603745 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 124.0 106.607317073 116% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.663101604278 0.547539520022 121% => OK
syllable_count: 299.7 283.868780488 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 23.3190432432 43.030603864 54% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 113.444444444 112.824112599 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7777777778 22.9334400587 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.77777777778 5.23603664747 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0886704771359 0.215688989381 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0373567086679 0.103423049105 36% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0516690576886 0.0843802449381 61% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.065741399161 0.15604864568 42% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0583748308484 0.0819641961636 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.7 13.2329268293 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 61.2550243902 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 11.4140731707 126% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.12 8.06136585366 126% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 40.7170731707 160% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.0658536585 90% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.