Swedish vs Luxembourger Poverty
COMPARE
Swedish
Luxembourger
Poverty
Poverty Comparison
Swedes
Luxembourgers
10.6%
POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
23rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.6%
POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
21st/ 347
METRIC RANK
Swedish vs Luxembourger Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 538,612,277 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Swedes and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.299 and weighted average of 10.6%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 144,648,044 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Luxembourgers and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.268 and weighted average of 10.6%, a difference of 0.27%.
Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Swedish | Luxembourger |
| Minimum | 0.75% | 1.6% |
| Maximum | 50.0% | 19.5% |
| Range | 49.2% | 17.9% |
| Mean | 11.7% | 7.5% |
| Median | 9.7% | 6.8% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.4% | 4.8% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 11.4% | 8.3% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.0% | 3.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 8.7% | 3.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 8.7% | 3.9% |
Demographics Similar to Swedes and Luxembourgers by Poverty
In terms of poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Swedes are Italian (10.6%, a difference of 0.050%), Eastern European (10.6%, a difference of 0.11%), Croatian (10.6%, a difference of 0.24%), Immigrants from North Macedonia (10.6%, a difference of 0.34%), and Immigrants from Scotland (10.6%, a difference of 0.46%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Luxembourgers are Immigrants from North Macedonia (10.6%, a difference of 0.080%), Eastern European (10.6%, a difference of 0.16%), Immigrants from Scotland (10.6%, a difference of 0.19%), Italian (10.6%, a difference of 0.31%), and Croatian (10.6%, a difference of 0.51%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Poverty |
| Bhutanese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Immigrants | Scotland | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Immigrants | North Macedonia | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Luxembourgers | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Swedes | 99.7 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Italians | 99.7 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Croatians | 99.6 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Burmese | 99.6 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Immigrants | Northern Europe | 99.6 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Immigrants | Korea | 99.5 /100 | #28 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Greeks | 99.5 /100 | #29 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Danes | 99.5 /100 | #30 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Poles | 99.5 /100 | #31 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Iranians | 99.5 /100 | #32 | Exceptional 10.7% |