Yugoslavian vs Samoan Female Poverty
COMPARE
Yugoslavian
Samoan
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Yugoslavians
Samoans
13.1%
FEMALE POVERTY
76.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
148th/ 347
METRIC RANK
13.1%
FEMALE POVERTY
73.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
152nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Yugoslavian vs Samoan Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 285,591,967 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Yugoslavians and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.048 and weighted average of 13.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 225,052,897 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Samoans and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.151 and weighted average of 13.1%, a difference of 0.43%.
![Yugoslavian vs Samoan Female Poverty](/correlation-charts/metric-comparison/female-poverty/yugoslavians-vs-samoans-female-poverty-chart.webp)
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Yugoslavian | Samoan |
Minimum | 2.0% | 2.3% |
Maximum | 30.2% | 38.0% |
Range | 28.2% | 35.7% |
Mean | 12.4% | 12.8% |
Median | 12.1% | 12.5% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 9.7% | 9.7% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 14.5% | 14.4% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.8% | 4.7% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.5% | 5.8% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.5% | 5.8% |
Demographics Similar to Yugoslavians and Samoans by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Yugoslavians are Taiwanese (13.1%, a difference of 0.16%), Tsimshian (13.1%, a difference of 0.19%), Immigrants from Kazakhstan (13.0%, a difference of 0.25%), Immigrants from Germany (13.1%, a difference of 0.26%), and Immigrants from Peru (13.0%, a difference of 0.33%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Samoans are Immigrants from Germany (13.1%, a difference of 0.17%), Tsimshian (13.1%, a difference of 0.24%), Taiwanese (13.1%, a difference of 0.27%), Immigrants from Fiji (13.2%, a difference of 0.32%), and Armenian (13.2%, a difference of 0.39%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Pakistanis | 83.0 /100 | #140 | Excellent 12.9% |
Icelanders | 81.1 /100 | #141 | Excellent 13.0% |
Brazilians | 80.5 /100 | #142 | Excellent 13.0% |
Immigrants | Malaysia | 80.4 /100 | #143 | Excellent 13.0% |
Afghans | 79.8 /100 | #144 | Good 13.0% |
Syrians | 79.6 /100 | #145 | Good 13.0% |
Immigrants | Peru | 79.1 /100 | #146 | Good 13.0% |
Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 13.0% |
Yugoslavians | 76.9 /100 | #148 | Good 13.1% |
Taiwanese | 75.7 /100 | #149 | Good 13.1% |
Tsimshian | 75.5 /100 | #150 | Good 13.1% |
Immigrants | Germany | 74.9 /100 | #151 | Good 13.1% |
Samoans | 73.6 /100 | #152 | Good 13.1% |
Immigrants | Fiji | 71.0 /100 | #153 | Good 13.2% |
Armenians | 70.4 /100 | #154 | Good 13.2% |
Hungarians | 70.1 /100 | #155 | Good 13.2% |
Immigrants | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 69.7 /100 | #156 | Good 13.2% |
Immigrants | Northern Africa | 68.8 /100 | #157 | Good 13.2% |
Pennsylvania Germans | 67.3 /100 | #158 | Good 13.2% |
Costa Ricans | 63.6 /100 | #159 | Good 13.3% |
Immigrants | Nepal | 62.7 /100 | #160 | Good 13.3% |