Iroquois vs Tsimshian Male Poverty
COMPARE
Iroquois
Tsimshian
Male Poverty
Male Poverty Comparison
Iroquois
Tsimshian
13.2%
MALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
264th/ 347
METRIC RANK
12.8%
MALE POVERTY
0.3/ 100
METRIC RATING
244th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Iroquois vs Tsimshian Male Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 207,214,183 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Iroquois and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.608 and weighted average of 13.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 15,624,889 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Tsimshian and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.352 and weighted average of 12.8%, a difference of 3.2%.
Male Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Iroquois | Tsimshian |
| Minimum | 3.6% | 8.5% |
| Maximum | 100.0% | 21.8% |
| Range | 96.4% | 13.2% |
| Mean | 19.1% | 13.7% |
| Median | 14.9% | 13.1% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 11.5% | 10.7% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 19.1% | 16.3% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 7.5% | 5.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 16.8% | 3.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 16.6% | 3.6% |
Demographics Similar to Iroquois and Tsimshian by Male Poverty
In terms of male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Iroquois are Central American (13.2%, a difference of 0.36%), Spanish American Indian (13.1%, a difference of 0.76%), Trinidadian and Tobagonian (13.1%, a difference of 0.81%), Ottawa (13.1%, a difference of 0.83%), and Cherokee (13.1%, a difference of 0.95%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Tsimshian are Liberian (12.8%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from El Salvador (12.8%, a difference of 0.32%), Immigrants from Western Africa (12.9%, a difference of 0.67%), Immigrants from Sudan (12.9%, a difference of 0.73%), and Potawatomi (12.9%, a difference of 0.80%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Male Poverty |
| Tsimshian | 0.3 /100 | #244 | Tragic 12.8% |
| Liberians | 0.3 /100 | #245 | Tragic 12.8% |
| Immigrants | El Salvador | 0.2 /100 | #246 | Tragic 12.8% |
| Immigrants | Western Africa | 0.2 /100 | #247 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Immigrants | Sudan | 0.2 /100 | #248 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Potawatomi | 0.2 /100 | #249 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Immigrants | Nicaragua | 0.2 /100 | #250 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Immigrants | Cuba | 0.2 /100 | #251 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.2 /100 | #252 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Immigrants | Ghana | 0.2 /100 | #253 | Tragic 12.9% |
| Mexican American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #254 | Tragic 13.0% |
| Immigrants | Liberia | 0.1 /100 | #255 | Tragic 13.0% |
| Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 0.1 /100 | #256 | Tragic 13.0% |
| Immigrants | Trinidad and Tobago | 0.1 /100 | #257 | Tragic 13.1% |
| Cape Verdeans | 0.1 /100 | #258 | Tragic 13.1% |
| Cherokee | 0.1 /100 | #259 | Tragic 13.1% |
| Ottawa | 0.1 /100 | #260 | Tragic 13.1% |
| Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 0.1 /100 | #261 | Tragic 13.1% |
| Spanish American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 13.1% |
| Central Americans | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 13.2% |
| Iroquois | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 13.2% |