Italian vs Yugoslavian Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
COMPARE
Italian
Yugoslavian
Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Comparison
Italians
Yugoslavians
14.2%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG BOYS UNDER 16
99.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
50th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.9%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG BOYS UNDER 16
75.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
158th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Italian vs Yugoslavian Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 553,398,049 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Italians and poverty level among boys under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.511 and weighted average of 14.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 282,204,208 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Yugoslavians and poverty level among boys under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.219 and weighted average of 15.9%, a difference of 12.0%.
Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Italian | Yugoslavian |
Minimum | 1.1% | 2.4% |
Maximum | 100.0% | 60.0% |
Range | 98.9% | 57.6% |
Mean | 16.8% | 16.6% |
Median | 10.8% | 14.9% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.1% | 9.7% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 14.0% | 17.2% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 6.9% | 7.5% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 21.1% | 11.3% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 20.9% | 11.1% |
Similar Demographics by Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
Demographics Similar to Italians by Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
In terms of child poverty among boys under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Italians are Immigrants from Greece (14.2%, a difference of 0.13%), Czech (14.1%, a difference of 0.49%), Immigrants from Indonesia (14.1%, a difference of 0.57%), Immigrants from Moldova (14.1%, a difference of 0.59%), and Laotian (14.3%, a difference of 0.82%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 |
Croatians | 99.5 /100 | #43 | Exceptional 14.0% |
Estonians | 99.4 /100 | #44 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Immigrants | Scotland | 99.4 /100 | #45 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Greeks | 99.4 /100 | #46 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Immigrants | Moldova | 99.4 /100 | #47 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Immigrants | Indonesia | 99.4 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Czechs | 99.3 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 14.1% |
Italians | 99.2 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Immigrants | Greece | 99.2 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 14.2% |
Laotians | 99.0 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Philippines | 99.0 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Serbia | 99.0 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Immigrants | Pakistan | 99.0 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Zimbabweans | 99.0 /100 | #56 | Exceptional 14.3% |
Poles | 98.9 /100 | #57 | Exceptional 14.4% |
Demographics Similar to Yugoslavians by Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16
In terms of child poverty among boys under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Yugoslavians are Immigrants from Nepal (15.9%, a difference of 0.010%), Israeli (15.9%, a difference of 0.10%), French Canadian (15.9%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Chile (15.9%, a difference of 0.17%), and Syrian (15.9%, a difference of 0.26%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 |
Puget Sound Salish | 79.8 /100 | #151 | Good 15.8% |
Immigrants | Venezuela | 79.5 /100 | #152 | Good 15.8% |
French | 78.7 /100 | #153 | Good 15.8% |
Syrians | 77.5 /100 | #154 | Good 15.9% |
French Canadians | 76.6 /100 | #155 | Good 15.9% |
Israelis | 76.5 /100 | #156 | Good 15.9% |
Immigrants | Nepal | 76.0 /100 | #157 | Good 15.9% |
Yugoslavians | 75.9 /100 | #158 | Good 15.9% |
Immigrants | Chile | 74.8 /100 | #159 | Good 15.9% |
Immigrants | Northern Africa | 71.3 /100 | #160 | Good 16.0% |
Immigrants | Oceania | 71.3 /100 | #161 | Good 16.0% |
Guamanians/Chamorros | 69.6 /100 | #162 | Good 16.1% |
Costa Ricans | 68.1 /100 | #163 | Good 16.1% |
Immigrants | Albania | 67.9 /100 | #164 | Good 16.1% |
Colombians | 65.2 /100 | #165 | Good 16.1% |