South American vs Mongolian Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
South American
Mongolian
Single Female Poverty
Single Female Poverty Comparison
South Americans
Mongolians
20.0%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
95.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
120th/ 347
METRIC RANK
20.2%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
93.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
127th/ 347
METRIC RANK
South American vs Mongolian Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 482,993,980 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of South Americans and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.213 and weighted average of 20.0%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 139,671,707 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Mongolians and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.114 and weighted average of 20.2%, a difference of 0.58%.
Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | South American | Mongolian |
| Minimum | 9.4% | 3.5% |
| Maximum | 46.7% | 47.1% |
| Range | 37.3% | 43.6% |
| Mean | 20.2% | 19.9% |
| Median | 19.5% | 19.2% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 16.9% | 12.8% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 22.4% | 23.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.5% | 10.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.2% | 9.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.2% | 9.5% |
Demographics Similar to South Americans and Mongolians by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to South Americans are Immigrants from Switzerland (20.0%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from South America (20.0%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Afghanistan (20.0%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Ethiopia (20.0%, a difference of 0.10%), and Polish (20.0%, a difference of 0.17%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Mongolians are Serbian (20.1%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Spain (20.2%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from South Africa (20.1%, a difference of 0.19%), Immigrants from Morocco (20.2%, a difference of 0.19%), and Immigrants from Hungary (20.2%, a difference of 0.21%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
| Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 95.9 /100 | #113 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | Colombia | 95.9 /100 | #114 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | Northern Africa | 95.8 /100 | #115 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 95.7 /100 | #116 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Poles | 95.6 /100 | #117 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | Afghanistan | 95.4 /100 | #118 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | Ethiopia | 95.4 /100 | #119 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| South Americans | 95.1 /100 | #120 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | Switzerland | 95.1 /100 | #121 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Immigrants | South America | 95.0 /100 | #122 | Exceptional 20.0% |
| Brazilians | 94.4 /100 | #123 | Exceptional 20.1% |
| Immigrants | Chile | 94.3 /100 | #124 | Exceptional 20.1% |
| Immigrants | South Africa | 93.9 /100 | #125 | Exceptional 20.1% |
| Serbians | 93.3 /100 | #126 | Exceptional 20.1% |
| Mongolians | 93.2 /100 | #127 | Exceptional 20.2% |
| Immigrants | Spain | 92.7 /100 | #128 | Exceptional 20.2% |
| Immigrants | Morocco | 92.4 /100 | #129 | Exceptional 20.2% |
| Immigrants | Hungary | 92.3 /100 | #130 | Exceptional 20.2% |
| Pakistanis | 92.1 /100 | #131 | Exceptional 20.2% |
| Uruguayans | 92.1 /100 | #132 | Exceptional 20.2% |
| Immigrants | England | 91.9 /100 | #133 | Exceptional 20.2% |