Iroquois vs Czechoslovakian Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
COMPARE
Iroquois
Czechoslovakian
Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Comparison
Iroquois
Czechoslovakians
19.6%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG BOYS UNDER 16
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
264th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.3%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG BOYS UNDER 16
92.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
125th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Iroquois vs Czechoslovakian Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 205,755,154 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Iroquois and poverty level among boys under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.141 and weighted average of 19.6%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 361,979,827 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Czechoslovakians and poverty level among boys under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.175 and weighted average of 15.3%, a difference of 27.8%.
Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Iroquois | Czechoslovakian |
Minimum | 4.1% | 2.7% |
Maximum | 66.7% | 54.7% |
Range | 62.6% | 51.9% |
Mean | 27.9% | 24.4% |
Median | 27.9% | 20.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 19.5% | 13.0% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 33.7% | 32.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 14.3% | 19.7% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 13.9% | 13.3% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 13.7% | 13.1% |
Similar Demographics by Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
Demographics Similar to Iroquois by Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
In terms of child poverty among boys under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Iroquois are Guyanese (19.6%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from El Salvador (19.6%, a difference of 0.14%), Vietnamese (19.6%, a difference of 0.15%), Ottawa (19.5%, a difference of 0.22%), and Spanish American Indian (19.6%, a difference of 0.26%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 |
Mexican American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #257 | Tragic 19.4% |
Potawatomi | 0.2 /100 | #258 | Tragic 19.4% |
Spanish Americans | 0.2 /100 | #259 | Tragic 19.4% |
Shoshone | 0.2 /100 | #260 | Tragic 19.4% |
Immigrants | Ghana | 0.2 /100 | #261 | Tragic 19.4% |
Immigrants | Guyana | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 19.5% |
Ottawa | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 19.5% |
Iroquois | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 19.6% |
Guyanese | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 19.6% |
Immigrants | El Salvador | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 19.6% |
Vietnamese | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 19.6% |
Spanish American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 19.6% |
Immigrants | Cabo Verde | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 19.7% |
Cherokee | 0.1 /100 | #270 | Tragic 19.7% |
Chickasaw | 0.1 /100 | #271 | Tragic 19.8% |
Demographics Similar to Czechoslovakians by Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
In terms of child poverty among boys under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Czechoslovakians are Tlingit-Haida (15.3%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Norway (15.3%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Malaysia (15.3%, a difference of 0.30%), Palestinian (15.4%, a difference of 0.31%), and Carpatho Rusyn (15.4%, a difference of 0.36%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 |
Native Hawaiians | 93.4 /100 | #118 | Exceptional 15.2% |
Belgians | 93.1 /100 | #119 | Exceptional 15.2% |
South Africans | 93.0 /100 | #120 | Exceptional 15.2% |
Scottish | 93.0 /100 | #121 | Exceptional 15.2% |
Immigrants | Malaysia | 92.8 /100 | #122 | Exceptional 15.3% |
Immigrants | Norway | 92.3 /100 | #123 | Exceptional 15.3% |
Tlingit-Haida | 92.2 /100 | #124 | Exceptional 15.3% |
Czechoslovakians | 92.1 /100 | #125 | Exceptional 15.3% |
Palestinians | 91.3 /100 | #126 | Exceptional 15.4% |
Carpatho Rusyns | 91.1 /100 | #127 | Exceptional 15.4% |
Canadians | 90.6 /100 | #128 | Exceptional 15.4% |
Immigrants | Brazil | 90.3 /100 | #129 | Exceptional 15.4% |
Mongolians | 90.2 /100 | #130 | Exceptional 15.4% |
Immigrants | Western Europe | 90.0 /100 | #131 | Exceptional 15.4% |
Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 88.7 /100 | #132 | Excellent 15.5% |