Vietnamese vs Ecuadorian Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Vietnamese
Ecuadorian
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Vietnamese
Ecuadorians
19.5%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
0.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
261st/ 347
METRIC RANK
18.8%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
0.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
244th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Vietnamese vs Ecuadorian Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 169,480,173 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Vietnamese and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.407 and weighted average of 19.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 313,275,748 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Ecuadorians and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.161 and weighted average of 18.8%, a difference of 3.6%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Vietnamese | Ecuadorian |
Minimum | 0.61% | 1.9% |
Maximum | 51.8% | 46.8% |
Range | 51.2% | 44.9% |
Mean | 20.1% | 18.9% |
Median | 17.1% | 17.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 13.8% | 13.4% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 25.3% | 23.5% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 11.6% | 10.1% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 11.4% | 8.5% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 11.3% | 8.4% |
Demographics Similar to Vietnamese and Ecuadorians by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Vietnamese are Mexican American Indian (19.5%, a difference of 0.090%), Chickasaw (19.6%, a difference of 0.52%), Ottawa (19.4%, a difference of 0.67%), Salvadoran (19.4%, a difference of 0.77%), and Guyanese (19.4%, a difference of 0.89%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Ecuadorians are Immigrants from Nicaragua (18.8%, a difference of 0.070%), Shoshone (18.9%, a difference of 0.12%), Immigrants from Laos (18.9%, a difference of 0.14%), Immigrants from Cuba (18.8%, a difference of 0.28%), and Immigrants from Ghana (18.9%, a difference of 0.51%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
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% |
French American Indians | 0.3 /100 | #248 | Tragic 19.2% |
Potawatomi | 0.3 /100 | #249 | Tragic 19.2% |
Cape Verdeans | 0.3 /100 | #250 | Tragic 19.2% |
Immigrants | Trinidad and Tobago | 0.3 /100 | #251 | Tragic 19.2% |
Immigrants | Middle Africa | 0.3 /100 | #252 | Tragic 19.2% |
Immigrants | Guyana | 0.3 /100 | #253 | Tragic 19.3% |
Immigrants | Western Africa | 0.3 /100 | #254 | Tragic 19.3% |
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% |