Chinese vs Thai Family Poverty
COMPARE
Chinese
Thai
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Chinese
Thais
6.5%
FAMILY POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
2nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
6.7%
FAMILY POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
5th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chinese vs Thai Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 64,784,795 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chinese and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.039 and weighted average of 6.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 473,767,426 people shows a moderate negative correlation between the proportion of Thais and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.453 and weighted average of 6.7%, a difference of 2.8%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Chinese | Thai |
Minimum | 1.3% | 0.91% |
Maximum | 19.1% | 11.5% |
Range | 17.8% | 10.6% |
Mean | 6.8% | 4.7% |
Median | 6.3% | 4.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.5% | 3.3% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 9.0% | 5.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.5% | 2.4% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.1% | 2.1% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.1% | 2.1% |
Demographics Similar to Chinese and Thais by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chinese are Immigrants from Taiwan (6.6%, a difference of 1.6%), Filipino (6.6%, a difference of 2.2%), Immigrants from India (6.2%, a difference of 4.3%), Norwegian (6.9%, a difference of 5.9%), and Immigrants from Ireland (7.0%, a difference of 7.3%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Thais are Filipino (6.6%, a difference of 0.57%), Immigrants from Taiwan (6.6%, a difference of 1.2%), Norwegian (6.9%, a difference of 3.0%), Immigrants from Ireland (7.0%, a difference of 4.4%), and Bhutanese (7.0%, a difference of 5.4%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
Immigrants | India | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 6.2% |
Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 6.5% |
Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 6.6% |
Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 6.6% |
Thais | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 6.7% |
Norwegians | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 6.9% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 7.0% |
Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 7.0% |
Latvians | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Bulgarians | 99.8 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Immigrants | Singapore | 99.8 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Maltese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Swedes | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Iranians | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 7.1% |
Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Luxembourgers | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 7.2% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 7.3% |