Immigrants from South Central Asia vs Chinese Family Poverty
COMPARE
Immigrants from South Central Asia
Chinese
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Immigrants from South Central Asia
Chinese
7.2%
FAMILY POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
16th/ 347
METRIC RANK
6.5%
FAMILY POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
2nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from South Central Asia vs Chinese Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 471,025,257 people shows a moderate negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from South Central Asia and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.489 and weighted average of 7.2%. Similarly, 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%, a difference of 10.7%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Immigrants from South Central Asia | Chinese |
Minimum | 0.60% | 1.3% |
Maximum | 15.8% | 19.1% |
Range | 15.2% | 17.8% |
Mean | 5.4% | 6.8% |
Median | 5.2% | 6.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.7% | 3.5% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 6.5% | 9.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.9% | 5.5% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 2.5% | 4.1% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 2.5% | 4.1% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from South Central Asia and Chinese by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from South Central Asia are Luxembourger (7.2%, a difference of 0.22%), Immigrants from Lithuania (7.2%, a difference of 0.24%), Lithuanian (7.2%, a difference of 0.27%), Eastern European (7.2%, a difference of 0.54%), and Immigrants from Hong Kong (7.3%, a difference of 0.70%). Similarly, 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%), Thai (6.7%, a difference of 2.8%), Immigrants from India (6.2%, a difference of 4.3%), and Norwegian (6.9%, a difference of 5.9%).
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% |