Costa Rican vs Icelander Female Poverty
COMPARE
Costa Rican
Icelander
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Costa Ricans
Icelanders
13.3%
FEMALE POVERTY
63.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
159th/ 347
METRIC RANK
13.0%
FEMALE POVERTY
81.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
141st/ 347
METRIC RANK
Costa Rican vs Icelander 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 159,608,280 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Icelanders and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.234 and weighted average of 13.0%, a difference of 2.2%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Costa Rican | Icelander |
Minimum | 3.4% | 0.47% |
Maximum | 45.8% | 33.3% |
Range | 42.4% | 32.9% |
Mean | 11.8% | 11.8% |
Median | 11.5% | 10.4% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 6.8% | 6.2% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 13.6% | 14.1% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 6.8% | 7.8% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 7.0% | 7.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.9% | 7.8% |
Demographics Similar to Costa Ricans and Icelanders 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%), Pennsylvania German (13.2%, a difference of 0.41%), Immigrants from Northern Africa (13.2%, a difference of 0.58%), Immigrants from Bosnia and Herzegovina (13.2%, a difference of 0.68%), and Hungarian (13.2%, a difference of 0.73%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Icelanders are Brazilian (13.0%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Malaysia (13.0%, a difference of 0.12%), Afghan (13.0%, a difference of 0.21%), Syrian (13.0%, a difference of 0.24%), and Immigrants from Peru (13.0%, a difference of 0.31%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Pakistanis | 83.0 /100 | #140 | Excellent 12.9% |
Icelanders | 81.1 /100 | #141 | Excellent 13.0% |
Brazilians | 80.5 /100 | #142 | Excellent 13.0% |
Immigrants | Malaysia | 80.4 /100 | #143 | Excellent 13.0% |
Afghans | 79.8 /100 | #144 | Good 13.0% |
Syrians | 79.6 /100 | #145 | Good 13.0% |
Immigrants | Peru | 79.1 /100 | #146 | Good 13.0% |
Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 13.0% |
Yugoslavians | 76.9 /100 | #148 | Good 13.1% |
Taiwanese | 75.7 /100 | #149 | Good 13.1% |
Tsimshian | 75.5 /100 | #150 | Good 13.1% |
Immigrants | Germany | 74.9 /100 | #151 | Good 13.1% |
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% |