Nigerian vs Chickasaw Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Nigerian
Chickasaw
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Nigerians
Chickasaw
18.7%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
0.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
240th/ 347
METRIC RANK
19.6%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
262nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Nigerian vs Chickasaw Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 329,051,833 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Nigerians and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.028 and weighted average of 18.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 146,952,830 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.542 and weighted average of 19.6%, a difference of 5.0%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Nigerian | Chickasaw |
Minimum | 3.1% | 3.8% |
Maximum | 55.2% | 100.0% |
Range | 52.1% | 96.2% |
Mean | 19.5% | 26.8% |
Median | 18.2% | 21.7% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 16.3% | 17.6% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 22.0% | 31.3% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.7% | 13.6% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 8.6% | 15.5% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 8.5% | 15.4% |
Similar Demographics by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Demographics Similar to Nigerians by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Nigerians are Marshallese (18.7%, a difference of 0.14%), Immigrants from Eritrea (18.7%, a difference of 0.21%), American (18.8%, a difference of 0.32%), Immigrants from Nigeria (18.6%, a difference of 0.35%), and Immigrants from Cuba (18.8%, a difference of 0.47%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Sudanese | 1.1 /100 | #233 | Tragic 18.6% |
Fijians | 1.1 /100 | #234 | Tragic 18.6% |
Nepalese | 1.1 /100 | #235 | Tragic 18.6% |
Alsatians | 1.1 /100 | #236 | Tragic 18.6% |
Immigrants | Nigeria | 1.0 /100 | #237 | Tragic 18.6% |
Immigrants | Eritrea | 1.0 /100 | #238 | Tragic 18.7% |
Marshallese | 0.9 /100 | #239 | Tragic 18.7% |
Nigerians | 0.9 /100 | #240 | Tragic 18.7% |
Americans | 0.8 /100 | #241 | Tragic 18.8% |
Immigrants | Cuba | 0.7 /100 | #242 | Tragic 18.8% |
Immigrants | Nicaragua | 0.7 /100 | #243 | Tragic 18.8% |
Ecuadorians | 0.7 /100 | #244 | Tragic 18.8% |
Shoshone | 0.6 /100 | #245 | Tragic 18.9% |
Immigrants | Laos | 0.6 /100 | #246 | Tragic 18.9% |
Immigrants | Ghana | 0.5 /100 | #247 | Tragic 18.9% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Immigrants from Burma/Myanmar (19.7%, a difference of 0.12%), Jamaican (19.7%, a difference of 0.23%), Vietnamese (19.5%, a difference of 0.52%), Mexican American Indian (19.5%, a difference of 0.61%), and Immigrants from Jamaica (19.8%, a difference of 0.67%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.3 /100 | #255 | Tragic 19.3% |
Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 0.2 /100 | #256 | Tragic 19.3% |
Guyanese | 0.2 /100 | #257 | Tragic 19.4% |
Salvadorans | 0.2 /100 | #258 | Tragic 19.4% |
Ottawa | 0.2 /100 | #259 | Tragic 19.4% |
Mexican American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #260 | Tragic 19.5% |
Vietnamese | 0.2 /100 | #261 | Tragic 19.5% |
Chickasaw | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 19.6% |
Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 19.7% |
Jamaicans | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 19.7% |
Immigrants | Jamaica | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 19.8% |
Spanish Americans | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 19.8% |
Immigrants | Bangladesh | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 19.9% |
Spanish American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 19.9% |
Liberians | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 19.9% |