Immigrants from Uruguay vs Chickasaw Female Poverty
COMPARE
Immigrants from Uruguay
Chickasaw
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Immigrants from Uruguay
Chickasaw
14.0%
FEMALE POVERTY
14.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
206th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.9%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
270th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from Uruguay vs Chickasaw Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 133,241,940 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Uruguay and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.113 and weighted average of 14.0%. 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 13.1%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from Uruguay | Chickasaw |
| Minimum | 6.4% | 1.9% |
| Maximum | 21.5% | 38.6% |
| Range | 15.1% | 36.7% |
| Mean | 13.7% | 18.1% |
| Median | 13.3% | 17.3% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 11.4% | 14.6% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 15.3% | 20.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.9% | 6.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 3.8% | 5.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 3.7% | 5.9% |
Similar Demographics by Female Poverty
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Uruguay by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Uruguay are Ugandan (14.0%, a difference of 0.27%), Spaniard (13.9%, a difference of 0.84%), Immigrants from Western Asia (13.9%, a difference of 1.1%), Immigrants from Eastern Africa (14.2%, a difference of 1.1%), and Hmong (13.9%, a difference of 1.2%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Immigrants | Lebanon | 25.6 /100 | #199 | Fair 13.8% |
| Spanish | 21.4 /100 | #200 | Fair 13.9% |
| Immigrants | Kenya | 21.1 /100 | #201 | Fair 13.9% |
| Hmong | 21.1 /100 | #202 | Fair 13.9% |
| Immigrants | Western Asia | 20.7 /100 | #203 | Fair 13.9% |
| Spaniards | 18.9 /100 | #204 | Poor 13.9% |
| Ugandans | 15.4 /100 | #205 | Poor 14.0% |
| Immigrants | Uruguay | 14.0 /100 | #206 | Poor 14.0% |
| Immigrants | Eastern Africa | 9.0 /100 | #207 | Tragic 14.2% |
| Immigrants | Azores | 7.9 /100 | #208 | Tragic 14.2% |
| Panamanians | 7.7 /100 | #209 | Tragic 14.2% |
| Malaysians | 7.4 /100 | #210 | Tragic 14.3% |
| Moroccans | 7.2 /100 | #211 | Tragic 14.3% |
| Bermudans | 5.5 /100 | #212 | Tragic 14.4% |
| Alaskan Athabascans | 5.3 /100 | #213 | Tragic 14.4% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, 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%), Haitian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%), and Barbadian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| 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% |