Lumbee vs Crow Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
Lumbee
Crow
Single Female Poverty
Single Female Poverty Comparison
Lumbee
Crow
33.0%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
344th/ 347
METRIC RANK
32.4%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
343rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Lumbee vs Crow Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 91,816,335 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Lumbee and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.049 and weighted average of 33.0%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 58,998,568 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Crow and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.108 and weighted average of 32.4%, a difference of 1.8%.
![Lumbee vs Crow Single Female Poverty](/correlation-charts/metric-comparison/single-female-poverty/lumbee-vs-crow-single-female-poverty-chart.webp)
Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Lumbee | Crow |
Minimum | 6.8% | 15.4% |
Maximum | 80.6% | 61.5% |
Range | 73.8% | 46.1% |
Mean | 39.4% | 39.3% |
Median | 39.3% | 40.9% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 30.1% | 28.3% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 48.3% | 48.1% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 18.2% | 19.8% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 16.1% | 12.0% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 15.9% | 11.8% |
Demographics Similar to Lumbee and Crow by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Lumbee are Houma (33.8%, a difference of 2.4%), Puerto Rican (34.1%, a difference of 3.3%), Tohono O'odham (34.2%, a difference of 3.6%), Navajo (31.7%, a difference of 4.3%), and Sioux (31.3%, a difference of 5.6%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Crow are Navajo (31.7%, a difference of 2.4%), Sioux (31.3%, a difference of 3.7%), Houma (33.8%, a difference of 4.3%), Puerto Rican (34.1%, a difference of 5.2%), and Tohono O'odham (34.2%, a difference of 5.5%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
Apache | 0.0 /100 | #328 | Tragic 27.7% |
Menominee | 0.0 /100 | #329 | Tragic 27.8% |
Hopi | 0.0 /100 | #330 | Tragic 28.0% |
Natives/Alaskans | 0.0 /100 | #331 | Tragic 28.2% |
Yakama | 0.0 /100 | #332 | Tragic 28.3% |
Ute | 0.0 /100 | #333 | Tragic 28.4% |
Pueblo | 0.0 /100 | #334 | Tragic 28.6% |
Immigrants | Yemen | 0.0 /100 | #335 | Tragic 28.9% |
Colville | 0.0 /100 | #336 | Tragic 29.1% |
Yuman | 0.0 /100 | #337 | Tragic 29.4% |
Pima | 0.0 /100 | #338 | Tragic 30.3% |
Cheyenne | 0.0 /100 | #339 | Tragic 30.4% |
Cajuns | 0.0 /100 | #340 | Tragic 30.6% |
Sioux | 0.0 /100 | #341 | Tragic 31.3% |
Navajo | 0.0 /100 | #342 | Tragic 31.7% |
Crow | 0.0 /100 | #343 | Tragic 32.4% |
Lumbee | 0.0 /100 | #344 | Tragic 33.0% |
Houma | 0.0 /100 | #345 | Tragic 33.8% |
Puerto Ricans | 0.0 /100 | #346 | Tragic 34.1% |
Tohono O'odham | 0.0 /100 | #347 | Tragic 34.2% |