Australian vs Zimbabwean Married-Couple Family Poverty
COMPARE
Australian
Zimbabwean
Married-Couple Family Poverty
Married-Couple Family Poverty Comparison
Australians
Zimbabweans
4.3%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
48th/ 347
METRIC RANK
4.1%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
21st/ 347
METRIC RANK
Australian vs Zimbabwean Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 222,779,850 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Australians and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.805 and weighted average of 4.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 69,119,087 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.075 and weighted average of 4.1%, a difference of 5.7%.
Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Australian | Zimbabwean |
Minimum | 1.1% | 1.0% |
Maximum | 73.3% | 6.9% |
Range | 72.2% | 5.9% |
Mean | 6.5% | 3.4% |
Median | 4.1% | 3.4% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.2% | 2.2% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 5.9% | 4.3% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.7% | 2.1% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 10.7% | 1.5% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 10.6% | 1.5% |
Similar Demographics by Married-Couple Family Poverty
Demographics Similar to Australians by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Australians are Immigrants from South Central Asia (4.3%, a difference of 0.070%), Turkish (4.3%, a difference of 0.080%), Burmese (4.3%, a difference of 0.18%), British (4.3%, a difference of 0.19%), and Immigrants from Lithuania (4.3%, a difference of 0.19%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
Northern Europeans | 99.8 /100 | #41 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Scottish | 99.8 /100 | #42 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Swiss | 99.8 /100 | #43 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Immigrants | Japan | 99.8 /100 | #44 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Serbians | 99.8 /100 | #45 | Exceptional 4.3% |
British | 99.8 /100 | #46 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.8 /100 | #47 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Australians | 99.7 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Turks | 99.7 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Burmese | 99.7 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.7 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Russians | 99.7 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Welsh | 99.7 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Austrians | 99.7 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 4.3% |
French | 99.7 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Demographics Similar to Zimbabweans by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Zimbabweans are Maltese (4.1%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Ireland (4.1%, a difference of 0.27%), Immigrants from Singapore (4.1%, a difference of 0.37%), Bhutanese (4.1%, a difference of 0.39%), and Eastern European (4.1%, a difference of 0.62%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
Slovaks | 100.0 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 4.0% |
Poles | 100.0 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 4.0% |
Germans | 100.0 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 4.0% |
Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 4.0% |
Italians | 100.0 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 4.0% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Zimbabweans | 99.9 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Immigrants | Singapore | 99.9 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.9 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Immigrants | Taiwan | 99.9 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Cypriots | 99.9 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Danes | 99.9 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Scandinavians | 99.9 /100 | #28 | Exceptional 4.1% |