Iroquois vs Chickasaw Family Poverty
COMPARE
Iroquois
Chickasaw
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Iroquois
Chickasaw
10.7%
FAMILY POVERTY
0.3/ 100
METRIC RATING
251st/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.8%
FAMILY POVERTY
0.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
256th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Iroquois vs Chickasaw Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 207,014,123 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Iroquois and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.753 and weighted average of 10.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,601,652 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.000 and weighted average of 10.8%, a difference of 1.2%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Iroquois | Chickasaw |
Minimum | 1.5% | 3.7% |
Maximum | 100.0% | 33.3% |
Range | 98.5% | 29.7% |
Mean | 15.6% | 12.7% |
Median | 12.1% | 12.0% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 8.6% | 9.8% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 17.2% | 14.5% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 8.6% | 4.7% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 16.1% | 5.3% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 15.9% | 5.2% |
Demographics Similar to Iroquois and Chickasaw by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Iroquois are Immigrants from Zaire (10.7%, a difference of 0.12%), Immigrants from Western Africa (10.7%, a difference of 0.23%), Salvadoran (10.7%, a difference of 0.28%), Ecuadorian (10.8%, a difference of 0.53%), and Cuban (10.6%, a difference of 0.81%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Immigrants from Ghana (10.8%, a difference of 0.040%), Subsaharan African (10.9%, a difference of 0.070%), Mexican American Indian (10.9%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Liberia (10.8%, a difference of 0.26%), and Bangladeshi (10.9%, a difference of 0.46%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
Nepalese | 0.8 /100 | #243 | Tragic 10.4% |
Cree | 0.7 /100 | #244 | Tragic 10.5% |
Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 0.6 /100 | #245 | Tragic 10.5% |
Cherokee | 0.5 /100 | #246 | Tragic 10.6% |
Liberians | 0.4 /100 | #247 | Tragic 10.6% |
Nicaraguans | 0.4 /100 | #248 | Tragic 10.6% |
Cubans | 0.4 /100 | #249 | Tragic 10.6% |
Salvadorans | 0.3 /100 | #250 | Tragic 10.7% |
Iroquois | 0.3 /100 | #251 | Tragic 10.7% |
Immigrants | Zaire | 0.3 /100 | #252 | Tragic 10.7% |
Immigrants | Western Africa | 0.3 /100 | #253 | Tragic 10.7% |
Ecuadorians | 0.2 /100 | #254 | Tragic 10.8% |
Immigrants | Liberia | 0.2 /100 | #255 | Tragic 10.8% |
Chickasaw | 0.2 /100 | #256 | Tragic 10.8% |
Immigrants | Ghana | 0.2 /100 | #257 | Tragic 10.8% |
Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.2 /100 | #258 | Tragic 10.9% |
Mexican American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #259 | Tragic 10.9% |
Bangladeshis | 0.2 /100 | #260 | Tragic 10.9% |
Shoshone | 0.2 /100 | #261 | Tragic 10.9% |
Spanish American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #262 | Tragic 10.9% |
Cape Verdeans | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 10.9% |