Immigrants from Serbia vs Latvian In Labor Force | Age 35-44

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 131,723,933 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Serbia and labor force participation rate among population between the ages 35 and 44 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.148 and weighted average of 85.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 220,671,100 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Latvians and labor force participation rate among population between the ages 35 and 44 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.046 and weighted average of 85.4%, a difference of 0.18%.

In Labor Force | Age 35-44 Correlation Summary

Measurement	Immigrants from Serbia	Latvian
Minimum	46.6%	55.4%
Maximum	100.0%	100.0%
Range	53.4%	44.6%
Mean	85.0%	87.3%
Median	85.7%	86.3%
Interquartile 25% (IQ1)	83.6%	84.3%
Interquartile 75% (IQ3)	88.7%	95.0%
Interquartile Range (IQR)	5.1%	10.7%
Standard Deviation (Sample)	9.0%	9.9%
Standard Deviation (Population)	8.9%	9.8%

Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Serbia and Latvians by In Labor Force | Age 35-44

In terms of in labor force | age 35-44, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Serbia are Slovene (85.6%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants from North Macedonia (85.6%, a difference of 0.050%), Carpatho Rusyn (85.6%, a difference of 0.050%), Bulgarian (85.5%, a difference of 0.060%), and Norwegian (85.6%, a difference of 0.10%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Latvians are Paraguayan (85.4%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Liberia (85.4%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Lithuania (85.4%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Greece (85.3%, a difference of 0.030%), and Immigrants from Eastern Africa (85.4%, a difference of 0.060%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	In Labor Force \| Age 35-44
Liberians	100.0 /100 \| #12	Exceptional 85.7%
Somalis	100.0 /100 \| #13	Exceptional 85.6%
Immigrants \| Somalia	100.0 /100 \| #14	Exceptional 85.6%
Norwegians	100.0 /100 \| #15	Exceptional 85.6%
Immigrants \| Ireland	100.0 /100 \| #16	Exceptional 85.6%
Immigrants \| North Macedonia	100.0 /100 \| #17	Exceptional 85.6%
Carpatho Rusyns	100.0 /100 \| #18	Exceptional 85.6%
Slovenes	100.0 /100 \| #19	Exceptional 85.6%
Immigrants \| Serbia	100.0 /100 \| #20	Exceptional 85.5%
Bulgarians	100.0 /100 \| #21	Exceptional 85.5%
Immigrants \| Bosnia and Herzegovina	100.0 /100 \| #22	Exceptional 85.4%
Immigrants \| Eastern Africa	100.0 /100 \| #23	Exceptional 85.4%
Latvians	99.9 /100 \| #24	Exceptional 85.4%
Paraguayans	99.9 /100 \| #25	Exceptional 85.4%
Immigrants \| Liberia	99.9 /100 \| #26	Exceptional 85.4%
Immigrants \| Lithuania	99.9 /100 \| #27	Exceptional 85.4%
Immigrants \| Greece	99.9 /100 \| #28	Exceptional 85.3%
Cambodians	99.9 /100 \| #29	Exceptional 85.3%
Bermudans	99.9 /100 \| #30	Exceptional 85.3%
Czechs	99.9 /100 \| #31	Exceptional 85.3%
Immigrants \| India	99.9 /100 \| #32	Exceptional 85.3%