Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Oceania Family Poverty
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Immigrants from Oceania
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Chickasaw
Immigrants from Oceania
10.8%
FAMILY POVERTY
0.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
256th/ 347
METRIC RANK
8.7%
FAMILY POVERTY
71.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
156th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Oceania 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 304,831,685 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Oceania and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.223 and weighted average of 8.7%, a difference of 24.1%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Oceania |
| Minimum | 3.7% | 0.73% |
| Maximum | 33.3% | 30.3% |
| Range | 29.7% | 29.6% |
| Mean | 12.7% | 10.9% |
| Median | 12.0% | 9.1% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 9.8% | 7.0% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 14.5% | 13.8% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.7% | 6.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.3% | 6.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.2% | 6.0% |
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 Immigrants from Oceania by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Oceania are Tsimshian (8.8%, a difference of 0.30%), White/Caucasian (8.8%, a difference of 0.34%), Immigrants from Kuwait (8.7%, a difference of 0.40%), Peruvian (8.8%, a difference of 0.50%), and Hungarian (8.8%, a difference of 0.64%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
| Mongolians | 80.4 /100 | #149 | Excellent 8.6% |
| Syrians | 80.3 /100 | #150 | Excellent 8.6% |
| Brazilians | 80.1 /100 | #151 | Excellent 8.6% |
| Samoans | 79.8 /100 | #152 | Good 8.6% |
| Immigrants | Spain | 79.1 /100 | #153 | Good 8.6% |
| Immigrants | Vietnam | 75.4 /100 | #154 | Good 8.7% |
| Immigrants | Kuwait | 73.6 /100 | #155 | Good 8.7% |
| Immigrants | Oceania | 71.2 /100 | #156 | Good 8.7% |
| Tsimshian | 69.3 /100 | #157 | Good 8.8% |
| Whites/Caucasians | 69.1 /100 | #158 | Good 8.8% |
| Peruvians | 68.0 /100 | #159 | Good 8.8% |
| Hungarians | 67.2 /100 | #160 | Good 8.8% |
| Immigrants | Northern Africa | 66.9 /100 | #161 | Good 8.8% |
| Ethiopians | 66.3 /100 | #162 | Good 8.8% |
| Pennsylvania Germans | 66.0 /100 | #163 | Good 8.8% |