Greek vs Laotian Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Greek
Laotian
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Greeks
Laotians
14.2%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
99.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
49th/ 347
METRIC RANK
14.5%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
98.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
67th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Greek vs Laotian Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 468,807,341 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Greeks and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.341 and weighted average of 14.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 222,726,350 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Laotians and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.162 and weighted average of 14.5%, a difference of 2.6%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Greek | Laotian |
Minimum | 5.0% | 2.3% |
Maximum | 85.1% | 35.0% |
Range | 80.1% | 32.7% |
Mean | 20.4% | 14.7% |
Median | 13.3% | 14.2% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 10.0% | 9.6% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 23.2% | 19.4% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 13.2% | 9.8% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 18.6% | 7.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 18.3% | 7.8% |
Demographics Similar to Greeks and Laotians by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Greeks are Czech (14.2%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants from Israel (14.2%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Pakistan (14.2%, a difference of 0.61%), Italian (14.3%, a difference of 0.76%), and Luxembourger (14.3%, a difference of 0.83%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Laotians are Immigrants from Argentina (14.6%, a difference of 0.15%), Immigrants from Belgium (14.5%, a difference of 0.41%), Immigrants from Sweden (14.5%, a difference of 0.56%), Immigrants from Philippines (14.4%, a difference of 0.60%), and Immigrants from Europe (14.4%, a difference of 0.71%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Czechs | 99.3 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Greeks | 99.2 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Immigrants | Israel | 99.2 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Immigrants | Pakistan | 99.1 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Italians | 99.1 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Luxembourgers | 99.0 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Estonians | 98.9 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Romania | 98.9 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Indonesia | 98.9 /100 | #56 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Serbia | 98.9 /100 | #57 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Bulgaria | 98.8 /100 | #58 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Zimbabweans | 98.8 /100 | #59 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Poles | 98.7 /100 | #60 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Cambodians | 98.7 /100 | #61 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Scandinavians | 98.7 /100 | #62 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Europe | 98.7 /100 | #63 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Philippines | 98.6 /100 | #64 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Sweden | 98.6 /100 | #65 | Exceptional 14.5% |
Immigrants | Belgium | 98.5 /100 | #66 | Exceptional 14.5% |
Laotians | 98.4 /100 | #67 | Exceptional 14.5% |
Immigrants | Argentina | 98.3 /100 | #68 | Exceptional 14.6% |