Slavic vs South African Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Slavic
South African
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Slavs
South Africans
15.7%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
83.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
147th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.5%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
88.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
137th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Slavic vs South African Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 266,780,772 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Slavs and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.742 and weighted average of 15.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 180,602,695 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of South Africans and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.734 and weighted average of 15.5%, a difference of 1.4%.
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Slavic | South African |
Minimum | 0.51% | 4.6% |
Maximum | 80.7% | 60.5% |
Range | 80.2% | 55.9% |
Mean | 23.6% | 17.6% |
Median | 18.5% | 14.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 14.0% | 10.8% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 28.6% | 17.7% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 14.6% | 6.9% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 15.8% | 13.3% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 15.6% | 12.9% |
Demographics Similar to Slavs and South Africans by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Slavs are Icelander (15.7%, a difference of 0.15%), Samoan (15.7%, a difference of 0.23%), Immigrants from Hungary (15.8%, a difference of 0.46%), Immigrants from Albania (15.8%, a difference of 0.50%), and Welsh (15.6%, a difference of 0.53%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to South Africans are Native Hawaiian (15.5%, a difference of 0.090%), Czechoslovakian (15.5%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Vietnam (15.5%, a difference of 0.13%), Immigrants from Spain (15.5%, a difference of 0.14%), and Armenian (15.5%, a difference of 0.23%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Mongolians | 89.7 /100 | #132 | Excellent 15.4% |
Brazilians | 89.6 /100 | #133 | Excellent 15.4% |
Immigrants | Spain | 89.1 /100 | #134 | Excellent 15.5% |
Czechoslovakians | 89.0 /100 | #135 | Excellent 15.5% |
Native Hawaiians | 89.0 /100 | #136 | Excellent 15.5% |
South Africans | 88.7 /100 | #137 | Excellent 15.5% |
Immigrants | Vietnam | 88.2 /100 | #138 | Excellent 15.5% |
Armenians | 87.9 /100 | #139 | Excellent 15.5% |
New Zealanders | 87.2 /100 | #140 | Excellent 15.6% |
Immigrants | Jordan | 87.2 /100 | #141 | Excellent 15.6% |
Canadians | 87.1 /100 | #142 | Excellent 15.6% |
Immigrants | Peru | 86.6 /100 | #143 | Excellent 15.6% |
Israelis | 86.3 /100 | #144 | Excellent 15.6% |
Welsh | 85.4 /100 | #145 | Excellent 15.6% |
Samoans | 84.2 /100 | #146 | Excellent 15.7% |
Slavs | 83.1 /100 | #147 | Excellent 15.7% |
Icelanders | 82.4 /100 | #148 | Excellent 15.7% |
Immigrants | Hungary | 80.9 /100 | #149 | Excellent 15.8% |
Immigrants | Albania | 80.7 /100 | #150 | Excellent 15.8% |
Venezuelans | 80.1 /100 | #151 | Excellent 15.8% |
Immigrants | Kuwait | 79.4 /100 | #152 | Good 15.8% |