Arapaho vs Chickasaw Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Arapaho
Chickasaw
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Arapaho
Chickasaw
21.7%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
314th/ 347
METRIC RANK
19.6%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
262nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Arapaho vs Chickasaw Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 29,689,796 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Arapaho and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.147 and weighted average of 21.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 146,952,830 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.542 and weighted average of 19.6%, a difference of 10.7%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Arapaho | Chickasaw |
Minimum | 7.0% | 3.8% |
Maximum | 80.0% | 100.0% |
Range | 73.0% | 96.2% |
Mean | 31.1% | 26.8% |
Median | 27.3% | 21.7% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 18.8% | 17.6% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 36.8% | 31.3% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 18.0% | 13.6% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 17.4% | 15.5% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 17.0% | 15.4% |
Similar Demographics by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Demographics Similar to Arapaho by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Arapaho are Creek (21.7%, a difference of 0.010%), Ute (21.8%, a difference of 0.28%), Immigrants from Mexico (21.6%, a difference of 0.51%), Immigrants from Guatemala (21.9%, a difference of 0.55%), and Dutch West Indian (21.6%, a difference of 0.75%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Immigrants | Bahamas | 0.0 /100 | #307 | Tragic 21.4% |
Houma | 0.0 /100 | #308 | Tragic 21.5% |
Bahamians | 0.0 /100 | #309 | Tragic 21.5% |
Immigrants | Somalia | 0.0 /100 | #310 | Tragic 21.6% |
Dutch West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #311 | Tragic 21.6% |
Immigrants | Mexico | 0.0 /100 | #312 | Tragic 21.6% |
Creek | 0.0 /100 | #313 | Tragic 21.7% |
Arapaho | 0.0 /100 | #314 | Tragic 21.7% |
Ute | 0.0 /100 | #315 | Tragic 21.8% |
Immigrants | Guatemala | 0.0 /100 | #316 | Tragic 21.9% |
Africans | 0.0 /100 | #317 | Tragic 21.9% |
Immigrants | Dominica | 0.0 /100 | #318 | Tragic 22.1% |
U.S. Virgin Islanders | 0.0 /100 | #319 | Tragic 22.1% |
Hondurans | 0.0 /100 | #320 | Tragic 22.2% |
Colville | 0.0 /100 | #321 | Tragic 22.5% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Immigrants from Burma/Myanmar (19.7%, a difference of 0.12%), Jamaican (19.7%, a difference of 0.23%), Vietnamese (19.5%, a difference of 0.52%), Mexican American Indian (19.5%, a difference of 0.61%), and Immigrants from Jamaica (19.8%, a difference of 0.67%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.3 /100 | #255 | Tragic 19.3% |
Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 0.2 /100 | #256 | Tragic 19.3% |
Guyanese | 0.2 /100 | #257 | Tragic 19.4% |
Salvadorans | 0.2 /100 | #258 | Tragic 19.4% |
Ottawa | 0.2 /100 | #259 | Tragic 19.4% |
Mexican American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #260 | Tragic 19.5% |
Vietnamese | 0.2 /100 | #261 | Tragic 19.5% |
Chickasaw | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 19.6% |
Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 19.7% |
Jamaicans | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 19.7% |
Immigrants | Jamaica | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 19.8% |
Spanish Americans | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 19.8% |
Immigrants | Bangladesh | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 19.9% |
Spanish American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 19.9% |
Liberians | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 19.9% |