Latvian vs Immigrants from Czechoslovakia Single Female Poverty

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 217,777,893 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Latvians and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.515 and weighted average of 19.0%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 193,433,983 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.635 and weighted average of 19.0%, a difference of 0.29%.

Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary

Measurement	Latvian	Immigrants from Czechoslovakia
Minimum	6.0%	3.1%
Maximum	90.7%	100.0%
Range	84.7%	96.9%
Mean	24.7%	24.5%
Median	18.5%	19.6%
Interquartile 25% (IQ1)	16.0%	15.2%
Interquartile 75% (IQ3)	25.6%	27.2%
Interquartile Range (IQR)	9.5%	12.0%
Standard Deviation (Sample)	16.6%	17.3%
Standard Deviation (Population)	16.4%	17.1%

Demographics Similar to Latvians and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia by Single Female Poverty

In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Latvians are Macedonian (18.9%, a difference of 0.19%), Immigrants from Argentina (19.0%, a difference of 0.28%), Immigrants from Eastern Europe (19.0%, a difference of 0.33%), Immigrants from Indonesia (18.9%, a difference of 0.35%), and Immigrants from Italy (19.0%, a difference of 0.37%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Czechoslovakia are Immigrants from Argentina (19.0%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Eastern Europe (19.0%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants from Italy (19.0%, a difference of 0.080%), Egyptian (19.1%, a difference of 0.12%), and Tsimshian (19.1%, a difference of 0.33%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	Single Female Poverty
Tongans	99.9 /100 \| #38	Exceptional 18.8%
Bulgarians	99.9 /100 \| #39	Exceptional 18.8%
Okinawans	99.9 /100 \| #40	Exceptional 18.8%
Immigrants \| Serbia	99.9 /100 \| #41	Exceptional 18.8%
Jordanians	99.9 /100 \| #42	Exceptional 18.8%
Immigrants \| Romania	99.9 /100 \| #43	Exceptional 18.8%
Immigrants \| Croatia	99.9 /100 \| #44	Exceptional 18.9%
Immigrants \| Indonesia	99.8 /100 \| #45	Exceptional 18.9%
Macedonians	99.8 /100 \| #46	Exceptional 18.9%
Latvians	99.8 /100 \| #47	Exceptional 19.0%
Immigrants \| Argentina	99.8 /100 \| #48	Exceptional 19.0%
Immigrants \| Czechoslovakia	99.8 /100 \| #49	Exceptional 19.0%
Immigrants \| Eastern Europe	99.8 /100 \| #50	Exceptional 19.0%
Immigrants \| Italy	99.8 /100 \| #51	Exceptional 19.0%
Egyptians	99.7 /100 \| #52	Exceptional 19.1%
Tsimshian	99.7 /100 \| #53	Exceptional 19.1%
Argentineans	99.7 /100 \| #54	Exceptional 19.1%
Immigrants \| Vietnam	99.7 /100 \| #55	Exceptional 19.1%
Immigrants \| Fiji	99.7 /100 \| #56	Exceptional 19.1%
Eastern Europeans	99.7 /100 \| #57	Exceptional 19.1%
Immigrants \| Bulgaria	99.7 /100 \| #58	Exceptional 19.1%