Immigrants from El Salvador vs Cherokee Female Poverty
COMPARE
Immigrants from El Salvador
Cherokee
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Immigrants from El Salvador
Cherokee
15.7%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
266th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.6%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
263rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from El Salvador vs Cherokee Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 357,675,141 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from El Salvador and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.715 and weighted average of 15.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 493,220,722 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Cherokee and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.397 and weighted average of 15.6%, a difference of 0.49%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from El Salvador | Cherokee |
| Minimum | 3.3% | 2.3% |
| Maximum | 100.0% | 61.8% |
| Range | 96.7% | 59.5% |
| Mean | 17.2% | 21.9% |
| Median | 14.8% | 19.3% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 12.0% | 16.3% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 18.3% | 25.5% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 6.3% | 9.2% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 11.7% | 10.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 11.6% | 10.5% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from El Salvador and Cherokee by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from El Salvador are Immigrants from Liberia (15.7%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Ecuador (15.6%, a difference of 0.36%), Subsaharan African (15.8%, a difference of 0.43%), Immigrants from Nicaragua (15.8%, a difference of 0.49%), and Guyanese (15.6%, a difference of 0.50%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Cherokee are Guyanese (15.6%, a difference of 0.010%), Mexican American Indian (15.6%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Guyana (15.6%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Ecuador (15.6%, a difference of 0.13%), and Cape Verdean (15.6%, a difference of 0.19%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 0.2 /100 | #254 | Tragic 15.4% |
| Ottawa | 0.2 /100 | #255 | Tragic 15.5% |
| Jamaicans | 0.2 /100 | #256 | Tragic 15.5% |
| Immigrants | Jamaica | 0.1 /100 | #257 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Shoshone | 0.1 /100 | #258 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Cape Verdeans | 0.1 /100 | #259 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Immigrants | Guyana | 0.1 /100 | #260 | Tragic 15.6% |
| 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% |