Zimbabwean vs Turkish Married-Couple Family Poverty
COMPARE
Zimbabwean
Turkish
Married-Couple Family Poverty
Married-Couple Family Poverty Comparison
Zimbabweans
Turks
4.1%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
21st/ 347
METRIC RANK
4.3%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
49th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Zimbabwean vs Turkish Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 69,119,087 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.075 and weighted average of 4.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 270,078,353 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Turks and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.361 and weighted average of 4.3%, a difference of 5.8%.
Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Zimbabwean | Turkish |
| Minimum | 1.0% | 0.78% |
| Maximum | 6.9% | 16.2% |
| Range | 5.9% | 15.5% |
| Mean | 3.4% | 4.6% |
| Median | 3.4% | 3.6% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.2% | 2.6% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 4.3% | 4.9% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.1% | 2.4% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 1.5% | 3.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 1.5% | 3.5% |
Similar Demographics by Married-Couple Family Poverty
Demographics Similar to Zimbabweans by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Zimbabweans are Maltese (4.1%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Ireland (4.1%, a difference of 0.27%), Immigrants from Singapore (4.1%, a difference of 0.37%), Bhutanese (4.1%, a difference of 0.39%), and Eastern European (4.1%, a difference of 0.62%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Slovaks | 100.0 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Poles | 100.0 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Germans | 100.0 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Italians | 100.0 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Zimbabweans | 99.9 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Immigrants | Singapore | 99.9 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.9 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Immigrants | Taiwan | 99.9 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Cypriots | 99.9 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Danes | 99.9 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Scandinavians | 99.9 /100 | #28 | Exceptional 4.1% |
Demographics Similar to Turks by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Turks are Australian (4.3%, a difference of 0.080%), Burmese (4.3%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Lithuania (4.3%, a difference of 0.11%), Russian (4.3%, a difference of 0.13%), and Immigrants from South Central Asia (4.3%, a difference of 0.15%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Scottish | 99.8 /100 | #42 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Swiss | 99.8 /100 | #43 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | Japan | 99.8 /100 | #44 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Serbians | 99.8 /100 | #45 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| British | 99.8 /100 | #46 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.8 /100 | #47 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Australians | 99.7 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Turks | 99.7 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Burmese | 99.7 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.7 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Russians | 99.7 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Welsh | 99.7 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Austrians | 99.7 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| French | 99.7 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 99.7 /100 | #56 | Exceptional 4.3% |