Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Maltese Female Poverty
COMPARE
Immigrants from Hong Kong
Maltese
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Immigrants from Hong Kong
Maltese
11.2%
FEMALE POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
10th/ 347
METRIC RANK
11.2%
FEMALE POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
11th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from Hong Kong vs Maltese Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 253,845,930 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Hong Kong and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.289 and weighted average of 11.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 126,421,821 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Maltese and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.280 and weighted average of 11.2%, a difference of 0.11%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from Hong Kong | Maltese |
| Minimum | 1.3% | 0.74% |
| Maximum | 18.6% | 37.5% |
| Range | 17.3% | 36.8% |
| Mean | 9.4% | 10.4% |
| Median | 9.5% | 9.7% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.2% | 6.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 10.9% | 12.2% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.7% | 5.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 3.4% | 7.0% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 3.4% | 6.9% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Hong Kong and Maltese by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Hong Kong are Bhutanese (11.3%, a difference of 0.57%), Immigrants from Lithuania (11.3%, a difference of 0.58%), Bulgarian (11.1%, a difference of 0.80%), Immigrants from South Central Asia (11.1%, a difference of 0.99%), and Lithuanian (11.4%, a difference of 1.5%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Maltese are Bhutanese (11.3%, a difference of 0.46%), Immigrants from Lithuania (11.3%, a difference of 0.47%), Bulgarian (11.1%, a difference of 0.91%), Immigrants from South Central Asia (11.1%, a difference of 1.1%), and Lithuanian (11.4%, a difference of 1.4%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Immigrants | India | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 9.9% |
| Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Thais | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 10.9% |
| Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 11.0% |
| Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 11.0% |
| Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 11.1% |
| Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 11.1% |
| Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.9 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 11.2% |
| Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 11.2% |
| Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 11.3% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 11.3% |
| Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 11.4% |
| Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 11.4% |
| Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Immigrants | Scotland | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 11.5% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 11.5% |