The pie charts below show the average household expenditures in Japan and Malaysia in the year 2010.
The charts compare the average household spendings in term of five important categories in two different countries namely Japan and Malaysia in 2010.
Overall, householders in both nation spent the majority percentage of their income on 3 categories namely housing, food and goods and services. However, the proportion of expenditure on transports and health care in Japan were double those of Malaysia.
34% of expenses in Malaysia, which occupied for the largest part, was for housing whereas the number of Japan was significantly lower, at 21%. In contrast, Japanese householders spent the highest proportion on a range of other goods and services, which accounted for 29%, compared to 26% of Malaysia. In both Japan and Malaysia, the percentage of money spent on food was similar, at 24% and 27% respectively.
Health care constituted the lowest proportion of the total. In Japan, this category accounted for only 6%, while 20% of total household expenditures were budgeted for transport. These figures were exactly double those shown for Malaysia.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-20 | Chayacp | 56 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | Jesslynindah | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-17 | thanhthanh211 | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | Zulph_ | 84 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | faraj27 | 73 | view |
- The chart below shows the waste disposal in 1 European country in four years 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. 61
- The table below shows the percentage of the population by age groups inone town who rode bicycles in 2011 61
- The best way to resolve international environmental problems is to increase the cost of fuel. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 61
- The graph below shows the number of overseas visitors to three different areas in a European country between 1987 and 2007. 56
- The best way to resolve international environmental problems is to increase the cost of fuel. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, whereas, while, as for, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 27.0 33.7804878049 80% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 892.0 965.302439024 92% => OK
No of words: 166.0 196.424390244 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3734939759 4.92477711251 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.58944267634 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88998450713 2.65546596893 109% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.578313253012 0.547539520022 106% => OK
syllable_count: 271.8 283.868780488 96% => 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: 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: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 34.6698716467 43.030603864 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.1111111111 112.824112599 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4444444444 22.9334400587 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.33333333333 5.23603664747 102% => 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: 0.240203533086 0.215688989381 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101808646896 0.103423049105 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0816157747061 0.0843802449381 97% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.165717293981 0.15604864568 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0763107771583 0.0819641961636 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 13.2329268293 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 61.2550243902 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 10.3012195122 100% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.87 11.4140731707 122% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.0 8.06136585366 112% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 40.7170731707 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => 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.