Chickasaw vs Ottawa Poverty
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Ottawa
Poverty
Poverty Comparison
Chickasaw
Ottawa
14.7%
POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
272nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
14.3%
POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
258th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chickasaw vs Ottawa Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,672,043 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.009 and weighted average of 14.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 49,944,420 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Ottawa and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.102 and weighted average of 14.3%, a difference of 2.6%.
![Chickasaw vs Ottawa Poverty](/correlation-charts/metric-comparison/poverty/chickasaw-vs-ottawa-poverty-chart.webp)
Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Chickasaw | Ottawa |
Minimum | 0.99% | 1.8% |
Maximum | 35.7% | 29.4% |
Range | 34.7% | 27.6% |
Mean | 16.2% | 13.2% |
Median | 15.3% | 13.4% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 13.3% | 9.8% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 18.7% | 16.3% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.4% | 6.5% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.4% | 5.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.4% | 5.8% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw and Ottawa by Poverty
In terms of poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Shoshone (14.7%, a difference of 0.040%), Spanish American (14.7%, a difference of 0.53%), Central American (14.6%, a difference of 0.63%), Immigrants from Cuba (14.6%, a difference of 0.77%), and Subsaharan African (14.5%, a difference of 0.92%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Ottawa are Trinidadian and Tobagonian (14.3%, a difference of 0.010%), Mexican American Indian (14.3%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Ecuador (14.3%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Nicaragua (14.3%, a difference of 0.27%), and Cape Verdean (14.4%, a difference of 0.35%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Poverty |
Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.1 /100 | #255 | Tragic 14.3% |
Mexican American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #256 | Tragic 14.3% |
Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 0.1 /100 | #257 | Tragic 14.3% |
Ottawa | 0.1 /100 | #258 | Tragic 14.3% |
Immigrants | Nicaragua | 0.1 /100 | #259 | Tragic 14.3% |
Cape Verdeans | 0.1 /100 | #260 | Tragic 14.4% |
Cherokee | 0.1 /100 | #261 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Liberia | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 14.4% |
Jamaicans | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Jamaica | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Guyana | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 14.5% |
Guyanese | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 14.5% |
Iroquois | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 14.5% |
Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 14.5% |
Immigrants | Cuba | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 14.6% |
Central Americans | 0.1 /100 | #270 | Tragic 14.6% |
Shoshone | 0.0 /100 | #271 | Tragic 14.7% |
Chickasaw | 0.0 /100 | #272 | Tragic 14.7% |
Spanish Americans | 0.0 /100 | #273 | Tragic 14.7% |
Barbadians | 0.0 /100 | #274 | Tragic 14.8% |
Immigrants | West Indies | 0.0 /100 | #275 | Tragic 14.8% |