Chinese vs Thai Male Poverty
COMPARE
Chinese
Thai
Male Poverty
Male Poverty Comparison
Chinese
Thais
8.7%
MALE POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
2nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
8.7%
MALE POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
3rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chinese vs Thai Male Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 64,801,112 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.236 and weighted average of 8.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 475,089,189 people shows a significant negative correlation between the proportion of Thais and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.625 and weighted average of 8.7%, a difference of 0.080%.
Male Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Chinese | Thai |
Minimum | 1.3% | 0.62% |
Maximum | 29.4% | 13.7% |
Range | 28.2% | 13.1% |
Mean | 9.7% | 5.8% |
Median | 8.9% | 5.2% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.8% | 3.9% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 12.4% | 7.3% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 7.6% | 3.4% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.4% | 2.6% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.4% | 2.6% |
Demographics Similar to Chinese and Thais by Male Poverty
In terms of male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chinese are Immigrants from Taiwan (8.9%, a difference of 2.4%), Maltese (9.1%, a difference of 4.4%), Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac (9.1%, a difference of 5.1%), Immigrants from Ireland (9.1%, a difference of 5.2%), and Filipino (9.2%, a difference of 5.9%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Thais are Immigrants from Taiwan (8.9%, a difference of 2.3%), Maltese (9.1%, a difference of 4.3%), Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac (9.1%, a difference of 5.1%), Immigrants from Ireland (9.1%, a difference of 5.1%), and Filipino (9.2%, a difference of 5.8%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Male Poverty |
Immigrants | India | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 8.2% |
Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 8.7% |
Thais | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 8.7% |
Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 8.9% |
Maltese | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 9.1% |
Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 9.1% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 9.1% |
Filipinos | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 9.2% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 9.3% |
Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 9.3% |
Bolivians | 99.9 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 9.4% |
Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.9 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 9.4% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 9.4% |
Immigrants | North Macedonia | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 9.4% |
Bhutanese | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Luxembourgers | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Latvians | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 9.6% |