Cuban vs Chickasaw Family Poverty
COMPARE
Cuban
Chickasaw
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Cubans
Chickasaw
10.6%
FAMILY POVERTY
0.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
249th/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.8%
FAMILY POVERTY
0.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
256th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Cuban vs Chickasaw Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 447,916,186 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Cubans and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.004 and weighted average of 10.6%. Similarly, 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%, a difference of 2.0%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Cuban | Chickasaw |
| Minimum | 2.2% | 3.7% |
| Maximum | 28.4% | 33.3% |
| Range | 26.2% | 29.7% |
| Mean | 11.4% | 12.7% |
| Median | 10.3% | 12.0% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 9.1% | 9.8% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 12.9% | 14.5% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.8% | 4.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.2% | 5.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.2% | 5.2% |
Demographics Similar to Cubans and Chickasaw by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Cubans are Nicaraguan (10.6%, a difference of 0.050%), Liberian (10.6%, a difference of 0.25%), Cherokee (10.6%, a difference of 0.34%), Salvadoran (10.7%, a difference of 0.53%), and Iroquois (10.7%, a difference of 0.81%). Similarly, 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 |
| Alaska Natives | 1.0 /100 | #242 | Tragic 10.4% |
| Nepalese | 0.8 /100 | #243 | Tragic 10.4% |
| Cree | 0.7 /100 | #244 | Tragic 10.5% |
| Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 0.6 /100 | #245 | Tragic 10.5% |
| Cherokee | 0.5 /100 | #246 | Tragic 10.6% |
| Liberians | 0.4 /100 | #247 | Tragic 10.6% |
| Nicaraguans | 0.4 /100 | #248 | Tragic 10.6% |
| 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% |