Latvian vs Bhutanese Family Poverty
COMPARE
Latvian
Bhutanese
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Latvians
Bhutanese
7.1%
FAMILY POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
9th/ 347
METRIC RANK
7.0%
FAMILY POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
8th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Latvian vs Bhutanese Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 220,290,550 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Latvians and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.048 and weighted average of 7.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 453,917,990 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.160 and weighted average of 7.0%, a difference of 0.44%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Latvian | Bhutanese |
Minimum | 1.4% | 1.3% |
Maximum | 26.1% | 49.5% |
Range | 24.7% | 48.2% |
Mean | 6.7% | 7.3% |
Median | 6.0% | 5.9% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.7% | 4.1% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.3% | 8.9% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.5% | 4.9% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.2% | 5.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.2% | 5.8% |
Demographics Similar to Latvians and Bhutanese by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Latvians are Bulgarian (7.1%, a difference of 0.25%), Immigrants from Singapore (7.1%, a difference of 0.27%), Maltese (7.1%, a difference of 0.55%), Swedish (7.1%, a difference of 0.60%), and Iranian (7.1%, a difference of 0.61%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Bulgarian (7.1%, a difference of 0.70%), Immigrants from Singapore (7.1%, a difference of 0.71%), Immigrants from Ireland (7.0%, a difference of 0.91%), Maltese (7.1%, a difference of 1.0%), and Swedish (7.1%, a difference of 1.1%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
Immigrants | India | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 6.2% |
Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 6.5% |
Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 6.6% |
Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 6.6% |
Thais | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 6.7% |
Norwegians | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 6.9% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 7.0% |
Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 7.0% |
Latvians | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Bulgarians | 99.8 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Immigrants | Singapore | 99.8 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Maltese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Swedes | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Iranians | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Luxembourgers | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 7.3% |