The bar chart below shows shares of expenditures for five major categories in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan in the year 2009.
The bar chart compares the percentage of shares of expenditures for selected categories in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan in 2009. From the general perspective, it could be observed that the majority of countries' expenditures was in housing, except in Japan, while the minority of countries' spending was in health care, except in the United States.
It is evident from the information provided that people in four regions spent a lot of money in housing, in which the United States was at the top of the expenditure at over 25%, followed by the United Kingdom, Japan, and Canada. In contrast, the Japanese paid more money in food at nearly a quarter of the expenditure. Transportation was also one of the categories that people used a lot of money.
On the other hand, people in four countries paid less money in health care and clothing, in which the United Kingdom had the lowest proportion of expenditure in health care at about 2%, while American's spending in clothing was lower than the other regions and stayed at approximately 4%.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-19 | tranthaolinh27052002 | 73 | view |
| 2019-08-23 | Cherry06 | 67 | view |
| 2019-08-22 | phanduydat | 78 | view |
| 2019-08-18 | lnmt2007 | 73 | view |
| 2019-07-22 | Prabhjot Sanghera | 91 | view |
- The charts below show the reasons why people travel to work by bicycle or by car. 73
- The chart shows the number of mobile phones and landlines per 100 people in selected countries. 56
- The bar chart below shows shares of expenditures for five major categories in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan in the year 2009. 73
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of Australian men and women in different age groups who did regular physical activity in 2010 61
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004. 61
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, so, while, in contrast, on the other hand
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 : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.15609756098 158% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 889.0 965.302439024 92% => OK
No of words: 181.0 196.424390244 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91160220994 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.66791821706 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.77201651829 2.65546596893 104% => OK
Unique words: 92.0 106.607317073 86% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.508287292818 0.547539520022 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 280.8 283.868780488 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.45097560976 110% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 22.4926829268 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 75.7011668778 43.030603864 176% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.166666667 112.824112599 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.1666666667 22.9334400587 132% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.83333333333 5.23603664747 150% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.324481656326 0.215688989381 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.186511239244 0.103423049105 180% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.220560624794 0.0843802449381 261% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.232019487502 0.15604864568 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.171158673007 0.0819641961636 209% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.2329268293 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.03 61.2550243902 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.51609756098 172% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.3012195122 146% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.79 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.44 8.06136585366 105% => OK
difficult_words: 38.0 40.7170731707 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 19.0 11.4329268293 166% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 10.9970731707 127% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.