The pie charts below shows the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in year 2010 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant

Essay topics:

The pie charts below shows the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in year 2010.

Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.

The given pie charts depict the common family expenses in tow Asian countries in 2010.
Overall, as seen clearly on the charts percentage of each expenditures varied wildly in both countries.

To begin with, the houses in Japan spent the highest (29%) part of their finances on other goods and services and foods took 24% of their money. Transport and hosing had 20% and 21% respectively, which is the interesting part. However, Malaysia households dedicated 34% of their budgets on housing, while transport, foods, other goods and services shared 63% of their incomes in different proportions (10%, 27%, 26% accordingly). Which indicated that these expenses were the main expenses of the most homes in both countries in 2010.

On the other hand, the two countries had the lowest parts of their budgets spent on health care. In Japan, just 6% of their expenditures was spent on their health. Compared to Japans, Malaysians dedicated only 3% of their finances for health care. This showed that health care had the least expenditure in both countries on the charts.

Votes
Average: 7.8 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2022-07-22 Juliana23 78 view
Essays by user Juliana23 :

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 33, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'charts'' or 'chart's'?
Suggestion: charts'; chart's
... 2010. Overall, as seen clearly on the charts percentage of each expenditures varied ...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 427, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Which” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... proportions 10%, 27%, 26% accordingly. Which indicated that these expenses were the ...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, however, if, while, to begin with, 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 : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 12.0 5.60731707317 214% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 33.7804878049 83% => 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: 891.0 965.302439024 92% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0625 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5838157985 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590909090909 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 243.0 283.868780488 86% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.0784303875 43.030603864 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.1 112.824112599 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 22.9334400587 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.5 5.23603664747 124% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => 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: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.107990463503 0.215688989381 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0467037237119 0.103423049105 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0370283332387 0.0843802449381 44% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0747675784521 0.15604864568 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0221651358101 0.0819641961636 27% => 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: 11.2 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 71.14 61.2550243902 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 11.4140731707 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.16 8.06136585366 101% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.