Norwegian vs Iranian Male Poverty
COMPARE
Norwegian
Iranian
Male Poverty
Male Poverty Comparison
Norwegians
Iranians
9.5%
MALE POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
17th/ 347
METRIC RANK
9.8%
MALE POVERTY
99.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
35th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Norwegian vs Iranian Male Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 532,206,209 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Norwegians and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.183 and weighted average of 9.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 316,583,039 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Iranians and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.087 and weighted average of 9.8%, a difference of 2.8%.
Male Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Norwegian | Iranian |
Minimum | 2.4% | 1.8% |
Maximum | 50.0% | 22.1% |
Range | 47.6% | 20.3% |
Mean | 9.8% | 7.8% |
Median | 8.9% | 7.4% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.5% | 5.5% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 10.1% | 9.1% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.5% | 3.6% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.1% | 3.4% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.1% | 3.3% |
Demographics Similar to Norwegians and Iranians by Male Poverty
In terms of male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Norwegians are Luxembourger (9.5%, a difference of 0.13%), Lithuanian (9.5%, a difference of 0.17%), Immigrants from Hong Kong (9.6%, a difference of 0.35%), Latvian (9.6%, a difference of 0.45%), and Immigrants from Scotland (9.6%, a difference of 0.71%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Iranians are Czech (9.8%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from Poland (9.8%, a difference of 0.30%), Immigrants from Northern Europe (9.7%, a difference of 0.45%), Macedonian (9.7%, a difference of 0.54%), and Tongan (9.7%, a difference of 0.74%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Male Poverty |
Luxembourgers | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Latvians | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Immigrants | Scotland | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Croatians | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Italians | 99.7 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Swedes | 99.7 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.6 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Burmese | 99.6 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Danes | 99.6 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Immigrants | Korea | 99.6 /100 | #28 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Greeks | 99.6 /100 | #29 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Poles | 99.5 /100 | #30 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Tongans | 99.5 /100 | #31 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Macedonians | 99.5 /100 | #32 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Immigrants | Northern Europe | 99.5 /100 | #33 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Immigrants | Poland | 99.5 /100 | #34 | Exceptional 9.8% |
Iranians | 99.4 /100 | #35 | Exceptional 9.8% |
Czechs | 99.4 /100 | #36 | Exceptional 9.8% |