Chickasaw vs Chinese Family Poverty
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Chinese
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Chickasaw
Chinese
10.8%
FAMILY POVERTY
0.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
256th/ 347
METRIC RANK
6.5%
FAMILY POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
2nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chickasaw vs Chinese Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,601,652 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.000 and weighted average of 10.8%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 64,784,795 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chinese and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.039 and weighted average of 6.5%, a difference of 66.7%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Chickasaw | Chinese |
| Minimum | 3.7% | 1.3% |
| Maximum | 33.3% | 19.1% |
| Range | 29.7% | 17.8% |
| Mean | 12.7% | 6.8% |
| Median | 12.0% | 6.3% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 9.8% | 3.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 14.5% | 9.0% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.7% | 5.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.3% | 4.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.2% | 4.1% |
Similar Demographics by Family Poverty
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Immigrants from Ghana (10.8%, a difference of 0.040%), Subsaharan African (10.9%, a difference of 0.070%), Mexican American Indian (10.9%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Liberia (10.8%, a difference of 0.26%), and Bangladeshi (10.9%, a difference of 0.46%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
| Cubans | 0.4 /100 | #249 | Tragic 10.6% |
| Salvadorans | 0.3 /100 | #250 | Tragic 10.7% |
| Iroquois | 0.3 /100 | #251 | Tragic 10.7% |
| Immigrants | Zaire | 0.3 /100 | #252 | Tragic 10.7% |
| Immigrants | Western Africa | 0.3 /100 | #253 | Tragic 10.7% |
| Ecuadorians | 0.2 /100 | #254 | Tragic 10.8% |
| Immigrants | Liberia | 0.2 /100 | #255 | Tragic 10.8% |
| Chickasaw | 0.2 /100 | #256 | Tragic 10.8% |
| Immigrants | Ghana | 0.2 /100 | #257 | Tragic 10.8% |
| Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.2 /100 | #258 | Tragic 10.9% |
| Mexican American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #259 | Tragic 10.9% |
| Bangladeshis | 0.2 /100 | #260 | Tragic 10.9% |
| Shoshone | 0.2 /100 | #261 | Tragic 10.9% |
| Spanish American Indians | 0.2 /100 | #262 | Tragic 10.9% |
| Cape Verdeans | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 10.9% |
Demographics Similar to Chinese by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chinese are Immigrants from Taiwan (6.6%, a difference of 1.6%), Filipino (6.6%, a difference of 2.2%), Thai (6.7%, a difference of 2.8%), Immigrants from India (6.2%, a difference of 4.3%), and Norwegian (6.9%, a difference of 5.9%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
| Immigrants | India | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 6.2% |
| Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 6.5% |
| Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 6.6% |
| Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 6.6% |
| Thais | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 6.7% |
| Norwegians | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 6.9% |
| Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 7.0% |
| Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 7.0% |
| Latvians | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Bulgarians | 99.8 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Immigrants | Singapore | 99.8 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Maltese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Swedes | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Iranians | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 7.2% |