Lithuanian vs Bhutanese Female Poverty
COMPARE
Lithuanian
Bhutanese
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Lithuanians
Bhutanese
11.4%
FEMALE POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
14th/ 347
METRIC RANK
11.3%
FEMALE POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
12th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Lithuanian vs Bhutanese Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 421,598,229 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Lithuanians and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.034 and weighted average of 11.4%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 455,052,143 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.207 and weighted average of 11.3%, a difference of 0.97%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Lithuanian | Bhutanese |
| Minimum | 1.0% | 2.5% |
| Maximum | 27.5% | 66.7% |
| Range | 26.5% | 64.2% |
| Mean | 11.1% | 11.1% |
| Median | 9.8% | 9.4% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 8.2% | 7.2% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 13.5% | 12.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.2% | 5.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.7% | 8.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.6% | 8.5% |
Demographics Similar to Lithuanians and Bhutanese by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Lithuanians are Latvian (11.4%, a difference of 0.32%), Immigrants from Bolivia (11.5%, a difference of 0.80%), Bolivian (11.5%, a difference of 0.87%), Immigrants from Scotland (11.5%, a difference of 0.92%), and Immigrants from Lithuania (11.3%, a difference of 0.96%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Immigrants from Lithuania (11.3%, a difference of 0.010%), Maltese (11.2%, a difference of 0.46%), Immigrants from Hong Kong (11.2%, a difference of 0.57%), Latvian (11.4%, a difference of 1.3%), and Bulgarian (11.1%, a difference of 1.4%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Thais | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 10.9% |
| Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 11.0% |
| Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 11.0% |
| Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 11.1% |
| Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 11.1% |
| Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.9 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 11.2% |
| Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 11.2% |
| Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 11.3% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 11.3% |
| Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 11.4% |
| Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 11.4% |
| Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Immigrants | Scotland | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Italians | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 11.6% |
| Swedes | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 11.6% |
| Burmese | 99.7 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 11.6% |