Immigrants from South Central Asia vs Bhutanese Male Poverty
COMPARE
Immigrants from South Central Asia
Bhutanese
Male Poverty
Male Poverty Comparison
Immigrants from South Central Asia
Bhutanese
9.3%
MALE POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
9th/ 347
METRIC RANK
9.5%
MALE POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
15th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from South Central Asia vs Bhutanese Male Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 472,354,703 people shows a significant negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from South Central Asia and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.620 and weighted average of 9.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 454,976,396 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.078 and weighted average of 9.5%, a difference of 2.1%.
Male Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Immigrants from South Central Asia | Bhutanese |
Minimum | 0.33% | 2.8% |
Maximum | 14.4% | 31.2% |
Range | 14.0% | 28.3% |
Mean | 6.6% | 8.9% |
Median | 6.2% | 8.0% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.6% | 5.9% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.4% | 11.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.8% | 5.1% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 3.0% | 4.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 3.0% | 4.8% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from South Central Asia and Bhutanese by Male Poverty
In terms of male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from South Central Asia are Bulgarian (9.3%, a difference of 0.56%), Filipino (9.2%, a difference of 0.79%), Bolivian (9.4%, a difference of 1.2%), Immigrants from Bolivia (9.4%, a difference of 1.3%), and Immigrants from Lithuania (9.4%, a difference of 1.4%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Immigrants from North Macedonia (9.4%, a difference of 0.29%), Luxembourger (9.5%, a difference of 0.52%), Norwegian (9.5%, a difference of 0.65%), Immigrants from Lithuania (9.4%, a difference of 0.67%), and Immigrants from Bolivia (9.4%, a difference of 0.79%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Male Poverty |
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% |
Immigrants | Scotland | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Croatians | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 9.6% |