Luxembourger vs French Canadian Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Luxembourger
French Canadian
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Luxembourgers
French Canadians
14.3%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
99.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
53rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
16.1%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
68.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
162nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Luxembourger vs French Canadian Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 142,903,603 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Luxembourgers and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.078 and weighted average of 14.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 487,191,826 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of French Canadians and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.410 and weighted average of 16.1%, a difference of 12.8%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Luxembourger | French Canadian |
Minimum | 1.4% | 2.6% |
Maximum | 33.3% | 100.0% |
Range | 32.0% | 97.4% |
Mean | 11.9% | 27.4% |
Median | 11.6% | 17.1% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 6.9% | 14.4% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 15.2% | 29.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 8.3% | 15.3% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 7.4% | 23.7% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 7.3% | 23.5% |
Similar Demographics by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Demographics Similar to Luxembourgers by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Luxembourgers are Italian (14.3%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Pakistan (14.2%, a difference of 0.21%), Estonian (14.3%, a difference of 0.43%), Immigrants from Romania (14.3%, a difference of 0.47%), and Immigrants from Indonesia (14.4%, a difference of 0.54%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Croatians | 99.3 /100 | #46 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Immigrants | Czechoslovakia | 99.3 /100 | #47 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Czechs | 99.3 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Greeks | 99.2 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Immigrants | Israel | 99.2 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Immigrants | Pakistan | 99.1 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Italians | 99.1 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Luxembourgers | 99.0 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Estonians | 98.9 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Romania | 98.9 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Indonesia | 98.9 /100 | #56 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Serbia | 98.9 /100 | #57 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Immigrants | Bulgaria | 98.8 /100 | #58 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Zimbabweans | 98.8 /100 | #59 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Poles | 98.7 /100 | #60 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Demographics Similar to French Canadians by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to French Canadians are Immigrants from Oceania (16.1%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Colombia (16.1%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Germany (16.1%, a difference of 0.19%), South American (16.1%, a difference of 0.21%), and Immigrants from Northern Africa (16.0%, a difference of 0.47%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Syrians | 76.7 /100 | #155 | Good 15.9% |
Immigrants | Fiji | 76.1 /100 | #156 | Good 15.9% |
Colombians | 76.1 /100 | #157 | Good 15.9% |
Guamanians/Chamorros | 75.3 /100 | #158 | Good 15.9% |
Slovaks | 75.2 /100 | #159 | Good 15.9% |
French | 72.8 /100 | #160 | Good 16.0% |
Immigrants | Northern Africa | 72.0 /100 | #161 | Good 16.0% |
French Canadians | 68.7 /100 | #162 | Good 16.1% |
Immigrants | Oceania | 68.4 /100 | #163 | Good 16.1% |
Immigrants | Colombia | 67.8 /100 | #164 | Good 16.1% |
Immigrants | Germany | 67.3 /100 | #165 | Good 16.1% |
South Americans | 67.2 /100 | #166 | Good 16.1% |
Uruguayans | 64.7 /100 | #167 | Good 16.2% |
Yugoslavians | 64.4 /100 | #168 | Good 16.2% |
Costa Ricans | 64.2 /100 | #169 | Good 16.2% |