Costa Rican vs Chickasaw Female Poverty
COMPARE
Costa Rican
Chickasaw
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Costa Ricans
Chickasaw
13.3%
FEMALE POVERTY
63.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
159th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.9%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
270th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Costa Rican vs Chickasaw Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 253,437,784 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Costa Ricans and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.003 and weighted average of 13.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,658,289 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.004 and weighted average of 15.9%, a difference of 19.6%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Costa Rican | Chickasaw |
Minimum | 3.4% | 1.9% |
Maximum | 45.8% | 38.6% |
Range | 42.4% | 36.7% |
Mean | 11.8% | 18.1% |
Median | 11.5% | 17.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 6.8% | 14.6% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 13.6% | 20.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 6.8% | 6.1% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 7.0% | 5.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.9% | 5.9% |
Similar Demographics by Female Poverty
Demographics Similar to Costa Ricans by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Costa Ricans are Immigrants from Nepal (13.3%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from Ethiopia (13.3%, a difference of 0.12%), Guamanian/Chamorro (13.3%, a difference of 0.12%), Immigrants from Albania (13.3%, a difference of 0.13%), and Ethiopian (13.3%, a difference of 0.14%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Samoans | 73.6 /100 | #152 | Good 13.1% |
Immigrants | Fiji | 71.0 /100 | #153 | Good 13.2% |
Armenians | 70.4 /100 | #154 | Good 13.2% |
Hungarians | 70.1 /100 | #155 | Good 13.2% |
Immigrants | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 69.7 /100 | #156 | Good 13.2% |
Immigrants | Northern Africa | 68.8 /100 | #157 | Good 13.2% |
Pennsylvania Germans | 67.3 /100 | #158 | Good 13.2% |
Costa Ricans | 63.6 /100 | #159 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Nepal | 62.7 /100 | #160 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Ethiopia | 62.5 /100 | #161 | Good 13.3% |
Guamanians/Chamorros | 62.4 /100 | #162 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Albania | 62.4 /100 | #163 | Good 13.3% |
Ethiopians | 62.3 /100 | #164 | Good 13.3% |
Scotch-Irish | 62.1 /100 | #165 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Oceania | 59.7 /100 | #166 | Average 13.3% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Iroquois (15.8%, a difference of 0.26%), Immigrants from St. Vincent and the Grenadines (15.9%, a difference of 0.28%), Belizean (15.9%, a difference of 0.50%), Haitian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%), and Barbadian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Cherokee | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 15.6% |
Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 15.6% |
Immigrants | Liberia | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 15.7% |
Immigrants | El Salvador | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 15.7% |
Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 15.8% |
Immigrants | Nicaragua | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 15.8% |
Iroquois | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 15.8% |
Chickasaw | 0.1 /100 | #270 | Tragic 15.9% |
Immigrants | St. Vincent and the Grenadines | 0.0 /100 | #271 | Tragic 15.9% |
Belizeans | 0.0 /100 | #272 | Tragic 15.9% |
Haitians | 0.0 /100 | #273 | Tragic 15.9% |
Barbadians | 0.0 /100 | #274 | Tragic 15.9% |
Immigrants | Barbados | 0.0 /100 | #275 | Tragic 16.0% |
Central Americans | 0.0 /100 | #276 | Tragic 16.0% |
Bangladeshis | 0.0 /100 | #277 | Tragic 16.0% |