The chart shows the numbers of tourists to Phu Quoc in the
years from 2012 to 2015.
The line graph illustrates the amount of travelers who went on a trip to Phu Quoc over the period of three years from 2012 to 2015.
Overall, there was a dramatical rise in the total number of tourists. However, the accumulation of foreign tourists just grew gradually over the three years. Between 2012 and 2015, the quantity of people who visited Phu Quoc shot up from 300.000 to nearly 1.500.000 visitors. There was a steady increase every year, for example the number doubled in just one year from 2012 to 2013, from 300.000 to 600.000 people. Next year, Phu Quoc attracted 400.000 more visitors, which meaned the amount of visitors in 2014 reached 1.000.000. Finally, in 2015, almost 500.000 more people traveled to Phu Quoc, so the number of total tourists peaked at 1.500.000.
On the other hand, the amount of foreigner visiting Phu Quoc just rose slightly from 100.000 to nearly 200.000 in two years, from 2012 to 2014. Briefly, the number almost reamained the same from 2014 to 2015, and it was still around 200.000 overseas tourists.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-18 | Sagar Gurung | 84 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | Hoangnhi | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | Hoang Luan | 78 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | Nguyen Bao Han | 78 | view |
| 2019-11-09 | KhangVTran | 56 | view |
- The graph below shows population figures for India and China since the year 2000 and predicted population growth up until 2050. 73
- Export value of Vietnam fruits 61
- Life circle of frog 78
- The chart shows the numbers of tourists to Phu Quoc in theyears from 2012 to 2015. 78
- The pie chart shows the distribution of different religions inVietnam in the year 2009. 56
Transition Words or Phrases used:
briefly, finally, however, so, still, as to, for example, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 6.8 29% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 873.0 965.302439024 90% => OK
No of words: 179.0 196.424390244 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.87709497207 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.65774358864 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31780970211 2.65546596893 87% => OK
Unique words: 101.0 106.607317073 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.564245810056 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 222.3 283.868780488 78% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.45097560976 83% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.4926829268 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 22.3330569358 43.030603864 52% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 97.0 112.824112599 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.8888888889 22.9334400587 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.33333333333 5.23603664747 159% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308508937719 0.215688989381 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.1484448661 0.103423049105 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0679598701369 0.0843802449381 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241407111297 0.15604864568 155% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0112499302672 0.0819641961636 14% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.2329268293 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 86.03 61.2550243902 140% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.0 10.3012195122 58% => Flesch kincaid grade is low.
coleman_liau_index: 11.02 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.67 8.06136585366 95% => OK
difficult_words: 35.0 40.7170731707 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.9970731707 87% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.