South American Indian vs Czech Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
South American Indian
Czech
Single Female Poverty
Single Female Poverty Comparison
South American Indians
Czechs
20.6%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
75.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
156th/ 347
METRIC RANK
21.0%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
46.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
175th/ 347
METRIC RANK
South American Indian vs Czech Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 163,615,516 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of South American Indians and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.149 and weighted average of 20.6%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 472,282,128 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Czechs and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.264 and weighted average of 21.0%, a difference of 2.0%.
Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | South American Indian | Czech |
| Minimum | 2.6% | 6.8% |
| Maximum | 100.0% | 80.9% |
| Range | 97.4% | 74.1% |
| Mean | 31.1% | 29.6% |
| Median | 25.0% | 25.3% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 16.4% | 20.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 41.7% | 36.2% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 25.3% | 15.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 24.0% | 14.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 23.6% | 14.3% |
Demographics Similar to South American Indians and Czechs by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to South American Indians are Samoan (20.6%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Oceania (20.7%, a difference of 0.12%), Danish (20.7%, a difference of 0.22%), Costa Rican (20.7%, a difference of 0.31%), and Arab (20.7%, a difference of 0.39%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Czechs are Cuban (21.0%, a difference of 0.20%), Immigrants from Guyana (21.0%, a difference of 0.24%), Guyanese (21.0%, a difference of 0.33%), Moroccan (21.0%, a difference of 0.37%), and New Zealander (21.0%, a difference of 0.40%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
| Samoans | 76.0 /100 | #155 | Good 20.6% |
| South American Indians | 75.7 /100 | #156 | Good 20.6% |
| Immigrants | Oceania | 74.3 /100 | #157 | Good 20.7% |
| Danes | 73.0 /100 | #158 | Good 20.7% |
| Costa Ricans | 71.8 /100 | #159 | Good 20.7% |
| Arabs | 70.8 /100 | #160 | Good 20.7% |
| Kenyans | 68.5 /100 | #161 | Good 20.8% |
| Northern Europeans | 68.4 /100 | #162 | Good 20.8% |
| Lebanese | 67.6 /100 | #163 | Good 20.8% |
| Iraqis | 64.5 /100 | #164 | Good 20.8% |
| Ugandans | 64.0 /100 | #165 | Good 20.8% |
| Norwegians | 63.0 /100 | #166 | Good 20.8% |
| Immigrants | Norway | 63.0 /100 | #167 | Good 20.8% |
| Immigrants | Costa Rica | 61.5 /100 | #168 | Good 20.9% |
| Immigrants | Trinidad and Tobago | 56.3 /100 | #169 | Average 20.9% |
| New Zealanders | 53.2 /100 | #170 | Average 21.0% |
| Moroccans | 52.8 /100 | #171 | Average 21.0% |
| Guyanese | 52.0 /100 | #172 | Average 21.0% |
| Immigrants | Guyana | 50.6 /100 | #173 | Average 21.0% |
| Cubans | 50.0 /100 | #174 | Average 21.0% |
| Czechs | 46.8 /100 | #175 | Average 21.0% |