Chickasaw vs Maltese Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Maltese
Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years
Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years Comparison
Chickasaw
Maltese
4.4%
UNEMPLOYMENT AMONG SENIORS OVER 65 YEARS
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
5th/ 347
METRIC RANK
5.2%
UNEMPLOYMENT AMONG SENIORS OVER 65 YEARS
19.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
198th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chickasaw vs Maltese Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 138,802,460 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and unemployment rate amomg seniors over the age of 65 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.227 and weighted average of 4.4%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 121,690,433 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Maltese and unemployment rate amomg seniors over the age of 65 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.692 and weighted average of 5.2%, a difference of 18.1%.
Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years Correlation Summary
Measurement | Chickasaw | Maltese |
Minimum | 0.87% | 2.8% |
Maximum | 28.2% | 24.7% |
Range | 27.4% | 21.9% |
Mean | 6.9% | 7.3% |
Median | 4.7% | 5.5% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.2% | 4.5% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.4% | 9.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.2% | 4.5% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.3% | 4.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.2% | 4.8% |
Similar Demographics by Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years
In terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Sudanese (4.4%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Cuba (4.5%, a difference of 1.3%), Immigrants from Congo (4.5%, a difference of 2.0%), Tsimshian (4.5%, a difference of 2.6%), and Indonesian (4.5%, a difference of 3.2%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years |
Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 4.2% |
Hmong | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 4.2% |
Fijians | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 4.2% |
Sudanese | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 4.4% |
Chickasaw | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 4.4% |
Immigrants | Cuba | 100.0 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 4.5% |
Immigrants | Congo | 100.0 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 4.5% |
Tsimshian | 100.0 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 4.5% |
Indonesians | 100.0 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 4.5% |
Immigrants | Zaire | 100.0 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 4.5% |
Comanche | 100.0 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 4.6% |
Osage | 100.0 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 4.6% |
Cubans | 100.0 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 4.6% |
Menominee | 100.0 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 4.6% |
Lumbee | 100.0 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 4.6% |
Demographics Similar to Maltese by Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years
In terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years, the demographic groups most similar to Maltese are Immigrants from Europe (5.2%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Pakistan (5.2%, a difference of 0.060%), Laotian (5.2%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Northern Africa (5.2%, a difference of 0.10%), and Subsaharan African (5.2%, a difference of 0.13%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Unemployment Among Seniors over 65 years |
Immigrants | Denmark | 31.0 /100 | #191 | Fair 5.2% |
Sioux | 30.8 /100 | #192 | Fair 5.2% |
Immigrants | Africa | 29.6 /100 | #193 | Fair 5.2% |
Argentineans | 29.1 /100 | #194 | Fair 5.2% |
Costa Ricans | 27.0 /100 | #195 | Fair 5.2% |
Immigrants | Poland | 24.3 /100 | #196 | Fair 5.2% |
Guamanians/Chamorros | 22.5 /100 | #197 | Fair 5.2% |
Maltese | 19.6 /100 | #198 | Poor 5.2% |
Immigrants | Europe | 19.0 /100 | #199 | Poor 5.2% |
Immigrants | Pakistan | 18.4 /100 | #200 | Poor 5.2% |
Laotians | 18.1 /100 | #201 | Poor 5.2% |
Immigrants | Northern Africa | 17.7 /100 | #202 | Poor 5.2% |
Sub-Saharan Africans | 17.1 /100 | #203 | Poor 5.2% |
Immigrants | China | 16.9 /100 | #204 | Poor 5.2% |
South American Indians | 15.3 /100 | #205 | Poor 5.2% |