Lumbee vs Tohono O'odham Female Poverty
COMPARE
Lumbee
Tohono O'odham
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Lumbee
Tohono O'odham
23.5%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
343rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
25.9%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
347th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Lumbee vs Tohono O'odham Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 92,256,229 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Lumbee and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.037 and weighted average of 23.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 58,715,136 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Tohono O'odham and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.573 and weighted average of 25.9%, a difference of 10.3%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Lumbee | Tohono O'odham |
Minimum | 1.9% | 1.4% |
Maximum | 65.5% | 87.1% |
Range | 63.6% | 85.7% |
Mean | 28.4% | 36.5% |
Median | 28.6% | 30.0% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 18.3% | 22.2% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 35.3% | 50.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 17.0% | 27.9% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 13.4% | 20.4% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 13.3% | 20.1% |
Demographics Similar to Lumbee and Tohono O'odham by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Lumbee are Pima (23.6%, a difference of 0.31%), Navajo (23.9%, a difference of 1.6%), Immigrants from Yemen (22.8%, a difference of 3.0%), Crow (22.1%, a difference of 6.2%), and Puerto Rican (25.2%, a difference of 7.1%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Tohono O'odham are Puerto Rican (25.2%, a difference of 3.0%), Navajo (23.9%, a difference of 8.6%), Pima (23.6%, a difference of 10.0%), Immigrants from Yemen (22.8%, a difference of 13.6%), and Crow (22.1%, a difference of 17.2%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Blacks/African Americans | 0.0 /100 | #328 | Tragic 18.6% |
Kiowa | 0.0 /100 | #329 | Tragic 18.6% |
Dominicans | 0.0 /100 | #330 | Tragic 19.1% |
Natives/Alaskans | 0.0 /100 | #331 | Tragic 19.2% |
Apache | 0.0 /100 | #332 | Tragic 19.2% |
Immigrants | Dominican Republic | 0.0 /100 | #333 | Tragic 19.3% |
Houma | 0.0 /100 | #334 | Tragic 20.0% |
Cheyenne | 0.0 /100 | #335 | Tragic 20.2% |
Pueblo | 0.0 /100 | #336 | Tragic 20.7% |
Yuman | 0.0 /100 | #337 | Tragic 20.8% |
Sioux | 0.0 /100 | #338 | Tragic 20.9% |
Hopi | 0.0 /100 | #339 | Tragic 21.0% |
Yup'ik | 0.0 /100 | #340 | Tragic 21.5% |
Crow | 0.0 /100 | #341 | Tragic 22.1% |
Immigrants | Yemen | 0.0 /100 | #342 | Tragic 22.8% |
Lumbee | 0.0 /100 | #343 | Tragic 23.5% |
Pima | 0.0 /100 | #344 | Tragic 23.6% |
Navajo | 0.0 /100 | #345 | Tragic 23.9% |
Puerto Ricans | 0.0 /100 | #346 | Tragic 25.2% |
Tohono O'odham | 0.0 /100 | #347 | Tragic 25.9% |