Turkish vs Houma Married-Couple Family Poverty
COMPARE
Turkish
Houma
Married-Couple Family Poverty
Married-Couple Family Poverty Comparison
Turks
Houma
4.3%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
49th/ 347
METRIC RANK
6.4%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
279th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Turkish vs Houma Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 270,078,353 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Turks and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.361 and weighted average of 4.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 36,736,486 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Houma and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.636 and weighted average of 6.4%, a difference of 47.8%.
Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Turkish | Houma |
| Minimum | 0.78% | 2.3% |
| Maximum | 16.2% | 34.9% |
| Range | 15.5% | 32.6% |
| Mean | 4.6% | 8.0% |
| Median | 3.6% | 6.5% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.6% | 4.8% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 4.9% | 8.4% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.4% | 3.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 3.6% | 6.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 3.5% | 6.5% |
Similar Demographics by Married-Couple Family Poverty
Demographics Similar to Turks by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Turks are Australian (4.3%, a difference of 0.080%), Burmese (4.3%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Lithuania (4.3%, a difference of 0.11%), Russian (4.3%, a difference of 0.13%), and Immigrants from South Central Asia (4.3%, a difference of 0.15%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Scottish | 99.8 /100 | #42 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Swiss | 99.8 /100 | #43 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | Japan | 99.8 /100 | #44 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Serbians | 99.8 /100 | #45 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| British | 99.8 /100 | #46 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.8 /100 | #47 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Australians | 99.7 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Turks | 99.7 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Burmese | 99.7 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.7 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Russians | 99.7 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Welsh | 99.7 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Austrians | 99.7 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| French | 99.7 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 4.3% |
| Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 99.7 /100 | #56 | Exceptional 4.3% |
Demographics Similar to Houma by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Houma are West Indian (6.4%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Trinidad and Tobago (6.4%, a difference of 0.25%), Mexican American Indian (6.4%, a difference of 0.56%), Seminole (6.4%, a difference of 0.56%), and Indonesian (6.3%, a difference of 0.73%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 0.1 /100 | #272 | Tragic 6.2% |
| Colville | 0.1 /100 | #273 | Tragic 6.3% |
| Barbadians | 0.1 /100 | #274 | Tragic 6.3% |
| Choctaw | 0.1 /100 | #275 | Tragic 6.3% |
| Yaqui | 0.1 /100 | #276 | Tragic 6.3% |
| Indonesians | 0.1 /100 | #277 | Tragic 6.3% |
| Immigrants | Trinidad and Tobago | 0.1 /100 | #278 | Tragic 6.4% |
| Houma | 0.0 /100 | #279 | Tragic 6.4% |
| West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #280 | Tragic 6.4% |
| Mexican American Indians | 0.0 /100 | #281 | Tragic 6.4% |
| Seminole | 0.0 /100 | #282 | Tragic 6.4% |
| Ute | 0.0 /100 | #283 | Tragic 6.4% |
| Dutch West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #284 | Tragic 6.4% |
| Blacks/African Americans | 0.0 /100 | #285 | Tragic 6.5% |
| Guyanese | 0.0 /100 | #286 | Tragic 6.5% |