Costa Rican vs Immigrants from Peru Female Poverty
COMPARE
Costa Rican
Immigrants from Peru
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Costa Ricans
Immigrants from Peru
13.3%
FEMALE POVERTY
63.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
159th/ 347
METRIC RANK
13.0%
FEMALE POVERTY
79.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
146th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Costa Rican vs Immigrants from Peru Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 253,437,784 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Costa Ricans and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.003 and weighted average of 13.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 328,728,905 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Peru and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.450 and weighted average of 13.0%, a difference of 1.9%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Costa Rican | Immigrants from Peru |
Minimum | 3.4% | 0.21% |
Maximum | 45.8% | 56.3% |
Range | 42.4% | 56.1% |
Mean | 11.8% | 14.4% |
Median | 11.5% | 12.8% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 6.8% | 11.0% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 13.6% | 16.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 6.8% | 5.7% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 7.0% | 7.0% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.9% | 7.0% |
Demographics Similar to Costa Ricans and Immigrants from Peru by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Costa Ricans are Immigrants from Nepal (13.3%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from Ethiopia (13.3%, a difference of 0.12%), Guamanian/Chamorro (13.3%, a difference of 0.12%), Pennsylvania German (13.2%, a difference of 0.41%), and Immigrants from Northern Africa (13.2%, a difference of 0.58%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Peru are Syrian (13.0%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Kazakhstan (13.0%, a difference of 0.080%), Afghan (13.0%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Malaysia (13.0%, a difference of 0.19%), and Brazilian (13.0%, a difference of 0.22%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Brazilians | 80.5 /100 | #142 | Excellent 13.0% |
Immigrants | Malaysia | 80.4 /100 | #143 | Excellent 13.0% |
Afghans | 79.8 /100 | #144 | Good 13.0% |
Syrians | 79.6 /100 | #145 | Good 13.0% |
Immigrants | Peru | 79.1 /100 | #146 | Good 13.0% |
Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 13.0% |
Yugoslavians | 76.9 /100 | #148 | Good 13.1% |
Taiwanese | 75.7 /100 | #149 | Good 13.1% |
Tsimshian | 75.5 /100 | #150 | Good 13.1% |
Immigrants | Germany | 74.9 /100 | #151 | Good 13.1% |
Samoans | 73.6 /100 | #152 | Good 13.1% |
Immigrants | Fiji | 71.0 /100 | #153 | Good 13.2% |
Armenians | 70.4 /100 | #154 | Good 13.2% |
Hungarians | 70.1 /100 | #155 | Good 13.2% |
Immigrants | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 69.7 /100 | #156 | Good 13.2% |
Immigrants | Northern Africa | 68.8 /100 | #157 | Good 13.2% |
Pennsylvania Germans | 67.3 /100 | #158 | Good 13.2% |
Costa Ricans | 63.6 /100 | #159 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Nepal | 62.7 /100 | #160 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Ethiopia | 62.5 /100 | #161 | Good 13.3% |
Guamanians/Chamorros | 62.4 /100 | #162 | Good 13.3% |