Armenian vs Chickasaw Single Male Poverty
COMPARE
Armenian
Chickasaw
Single Male Poverty
Single Male Poverty Comparison
Armenians
Chickasaw
12.1%
SINGLE MALE POVERTY
98.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
80th/ 347
METRIC RANK
16.3%
SINGLE MALE POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
318th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Armenian vs Chickasaw Single Male Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 275,861,464 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Armenians and poverty level among single males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.248 and weighted average of 12.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 140,053,704 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among single males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.328 and weighted average of 16.3%, a difference of 35.2%.
Single Male Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Armenian | Chickasaw |
| Minimum | 3.3% | 4.0% |
| Maximum | 21.2% | 67.9% |
| Range | 17.9% | 63.9% |
| Mean | 11.3% | 25.6% |
| Median | 11.1% | 23.1% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 9.5% | 16.6% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 13.5% | 31.0% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.0% | 14.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.0% | 12.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.0% | 12.6% |
Similar Demographics by Single Male Poverty
Demographics Similar to Armenians by Single Male Poverty
In terms of single male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Armenians are Immigrants from South America (12.1%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Colombia (12.1%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Chile (12.1%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Czechoslovakia (12.1%, a difference of 0.11%), and Turkish (12.1%, a difference of 0.18%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Male Poverty |
| Argentineans | 99.5 /100 | #73 | Exceptional 11.9% |
| Chileans | 99.5 /100 | #74 | Exceptional 11.9% |
| Uruguayans | 99.4 /100 | #75 | Exceptional 11.9% |
| Immigrants | Northern Africa | 99.4 /100 | #76 | Exceptional 11.9% |
| Immigrants | Malaysia | 99.2 /100 | #77 | Exceptional 12.0% |
| Immigrants | Venezuela | 99.1 /100 | #78 | Exceptional 12.0% |
| Immigrants | Belgium | 99.0 /100 | #79 | Exceptional 12.0% |
| Armenians | 98.7 /100 | #80 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| Immigrants | South America | 98.7 /100 | #81 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| Immigrants | Colombia | 98.6 /100 | #82 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| Immigrants | Chile | 98.6 /100 | #83 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| Immigrants | Czechoslovakia | 98.6 /100 | #84 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| Turks | 98.5 /100 | #85 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| Immigrants | Israel | 98.5 /100 | #86 | Exceptional 12.1% |
| South Americans | 98.5 /100 | #87 | Exceptional 12.1% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Single Male Poverty
In terms of single male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Chippewa (16.4%, a difference of 0.30%), Marshallese (16.4%, a difference of 0.78%), Black/African American (16.2%, a difference of 0.80%), Osage (16.5%, a difference of 0.91%), and Dutch West Indian (16.1%, a difference of 1.1%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Male Poverty |
| Seminole | 0.0 /100 | #311 | Tragic 16.0% |
| Comanche | 0.0 /100 | #312 | Tragic 16.0% |
| Cherokee | 0.0 /100 | #313 | Tragic 16.1% |
| Alaskan Athabascans | 0.0 /100 | #314 | Tragic 16.1% |
| Cheyenne | 0.0 /100 | #315 | Tragic 16.1% |
| Dutch West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #316 | Tragic 16.1% |
| Blacks/African Americans | 0.0 /100 | #317 | Tragic 16.2% |
| Chickasaw | 0.0 /100 | #318 | Tragic 16.3% |
| Chippewa | 0.0 /100 | #319 | Tragic 16.4% |
| Marshallese | 0.0 /100 | #320 | Tragic 16.4% |
| Osage | 0.0 /100 | #321 | Tragic 16.5% |
| Shoshone | 0.0 /100 | #322 | Tragic 16.7% |
| Creek | 0.0 /100 | #323 | Tragic 16.8% |
| Immigrants | Yemen | 0.0 /100 | #324 | Tragic 16.9% |
| Choctaw | 0.0 /100 | #325 | Tragic 17.0% |