Immigrants from Oceania vs Maltese Female Unemployment
COMPARE
Immigrants from Oceania
Maltese
Female Unemployment
Female Unemployment Comparison
Immigrants from Oceania
Maltese
5.2%
FEMALE UNEMPLOYMENT
79.5/ 100
METRIC RATING
145th/ 347
METRIC RANK
5.1%
FEMALE UNEMPLOYMENT
85.5/ 100
METRIC RATING
130th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from Oceania vs Maltese Female Unemployment Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 304,351,716 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Oceania and unemploymnet rate among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.803 and weighted average of 5.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 126,272,771 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Maltese and unemploymnet rate among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.063 and weighted average of 5.1%, a difference of 0.65%.
Female Unemployment Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from Oceania | Maltese |
| Minimum | 1.2% | 0.70% |
| Maximum | 29.1% | 15.8% |
| Range | 27.9% | 15.1% |
| Mean | 7.9% | 5.9% |
| Median | 5.5% | 5.0% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.7% | 4.1% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.9% | 7.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.3% | 3.6% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.9% | 3.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.8% | 3.2% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Oceania and Maltese by Female Unemployment
In terms of female unemployment, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Oceania are Immigrants from Norway (5.2%, a difference of 0.010%), Argentinean (5.2%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Jordan (5.1%, a difference of 0.090%), Palestinian (5.1%, a difference of 0.12%), and Immigrants from Kazakhstan (5.1%, a difference of 0.12%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Maltese are Immigrants from Ethiopia (5.1%, a difference of 0.020%), Ethiopian (5.1%, a difference of 0.030%), Chilean (5.1%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants from Hungary (5.1%, a difference of 0.070%), and Immigrants from Sri Lanka (5.1%, a difference of 0.070%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Unemployment |
| Immigrants | Hungary | 86.0 /100 | #127 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Chileans | 85.8 /100 | #128 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Ethiopians | 85.7 /100 | #129 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Maltese | 85.5 /100 | #130 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Ethiopia | 85.4 /100 | #131 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Sri Lanka | 85.0 /100 | #132 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Hong Kong | 84.8 /100 | #133 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Eritrea | 84.6 /100 | #134 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Latvia | 84.6 /100 | #135 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Indians (Asian) | 84.2 /100 | #136 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Pakistanis | 83.8 /100 | #137 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Chickasaw | 83.2 /100 | #138 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Eastern Asia | 83.0 /100 | #139 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | France | 82.7 /100 | #140 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Eastern Europe | 81.5 /100 | #141 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Palestinians | 80.8 /100 | #142 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 80.7 /100 | #143 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Jordan | 80.4 /100 | #144 | Excellent 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Oceania | 79.5 /100 | #145 | Good 5.2% |
| Immigrants | Norway | 79.4 /100 | #146 | Good 5.2% |
| Argentineans | 79.2 /100 | #147 | Good 5.2% |