Haitian vs Chickasaw Female Poverty
COMPARE
Haitian
Chickasaw
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Haitians
Chickasaw
15.9%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
273rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.9%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
270th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Haitian vs Chickasaw Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 287,638,574 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Haitians and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.397 and weighted average of 15.9%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,658,289 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.004 and weighted average of 15.9%, a difference of 0.51%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Haitian | Chickasaw |
| Minimum | 6.9% | 1.9% |
| Maximum | 26.6% | 38.6% |
| Range | 19.6% | 36.7% |
| Mean | 16.7% | 18.1% |
| Median | 15.8% | 17.3% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 14.1% | 14.6% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 19.3% | 20.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.2% | 6.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.1% | 5.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.1% | 5.9% |
Demographics Similar to Haitians and Chickasaw by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Haitians are Belizean (15.9%, a difference of 0.0%), Barbadian (15.9%, a difference of 0.0%), Immigrants from Barbados (16.0%, a difference of 0.070%), Central American (16.0%, a difference of 0.20%), and Immigrants from St. Vincent and the Grenadines (15.9%, a difference of 0.23%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Iroquois (15.8%, a difference of 0.26%), Immigrants from St. Vincent and the Grenadines (15.9%, a difference of 0.28%), Belizean (15.9%, a difference of 0.50%), Barbadian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%), and Immigrants from Barbados (16.0%, a difference of 0.58%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Guyanese | 0.1 /100 | #261 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Mexican American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Cherokee | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Immigrants | Liberia | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 15.7% |
| Immigrants | El Salvador | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 15.7% |
| Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Immigrants | Nicaragua | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Iroquois | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Chickasaw | 0.1 /100 | #270 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Immigrants | St. Vincent and the Grenadines | 0.0 /100 | #271 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Belizeans | 0.0 /100 | #272 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Haitians | 0.0 /100 | #273 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Barbadians | 0.0 /100 | #274 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Immigrants | Barbados | 0.0 /100 | #275 | Tragic 16.0% |
| Central Americans | 0.0 /100 | #276 | Tragic 16.0% |
| Bangladeshis | 0.0 /100 | #277 | Tragic 16.0% |
| Immigrants | West Indies | 0.0 /100 | #278 | Tragic 16.1% |
| Immigrants | Bahamas | 0.0 /100 | #279 | Tragic 16.1% |
| Vietnamese | 0.0 /100 | #280 | Tragic 16.1% |
| West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #281 | Tragic 16.1% |