Swedish vs Bhutanese Poverty
COMPARE
Swedish
Bhutanese
Poverty
Poverty Comparison
Swedes
Bhutanese
10.6%
POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
23rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.4%
POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
12th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Swedish vs Bhutanese Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 538,612,277 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Swedes and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.299 and weighted average of 10.6%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 455,158,170 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.226 and weighted average of 10.4%, a difference of 2.2%.
Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Swedish | Bhutanese |
Minimum | 0.75% | 1.3% |
Maximum | 50.0% | 55.6% |
Range | 49.2% | 54.3% |
Mean | 11.7% | 10.1% |
Median | 9.7% | 9.0% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.4% | 6.3% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 11.4% | 12.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.0% | 5.6% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 8.7% | 7.5% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 8.7% | 7.5% |
Demographics Similar to Swedes and Bhutanese by Poverty
In terms of poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Swedes are Italian (10.6%, a difference of 0.050%), Eastern European (10.6%, a difference of 0.11%), Croatian (10.6%, a difference of 0.24%), Luxembourger (10.6%, a difference of 0.27%), and Immigrants from North Macedonia (10.6%, a difference of 0.34%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Immigrants from Hong Kong (10.4%, a difference of 0.22%), Immigrants from Lithuania (10.3%, a difference of 0.35%), Immigrants from Bolivia (10.4%, a difference of 0.53%), Bolivian (10.4%, a difference of 0.54%), and Lithuanian (10.5%, a difference of 0.84%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Poverty |
Filipinos | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 10.3% |
Bhutanese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 10.5% |
Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 10.5% |
Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 10.5% |
Immigrants | Scotland | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Immigrants | North Macedonia | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Luxembourgers | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Swedes | 99.7 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Italians | 99.7 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Croatians | 99.6 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Burmese | 99.6 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 10.7% |
Immigrants | Northern Europe | 99.6 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 10.7% |