Indian (Asian) vs Immigrants from Indonesia Married-Couple Family Poverty

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 487,935,416 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Indians (Asian) and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.518 and weighted average of 4.8%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 214,935,833 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Indonesia and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.693 and weighted average of 4.8%, a difference of 1.1%.

Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary

Measurement	Indian (Asian)	Immigrants from Indonesia
Minimum	1.7%	1.0%
Maximum	16.6%	17.0%
Range	14.9%	16.0%
Mean	5.3%	5.2%
Median	4.3%	4.9%
Interquartile 25% (IQ1)	3.3%	3.9%
Interquartile 75% (IQ3)	6.5%	5.7%
Interquartile Range (IQR)	3.2%	1.8%
Standard Deviation (Sample)	2.9%	3.2%
Standard Deviation (Population)	2.9%	3.1%

Demographics Similar to Indians (Asian) and Immigrants from Indonesia by Married-Couple Family Poverty

In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Indians (Asian) are White/Caucasian (4.8%, a difference of 0.050%), Jordanian (4.8%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Southern Europe (4.8%, a difference of 0.090%), Romanian (4.8%, a difference of 0.33%), and Immigrants from Bosnia and Herzegovina (4.8%, a difference of 0.35%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Indonesia are Taiwanese (4.8%, a difference of 0.15%), Celtic (4.8%, a difference of 0.16%), Kenyan (4.8%, a difference of 0.26%), Immigrants from Philippines (4.8%, a difference of 0.28%), and Immigrants from Nepal (4.7%, a difference of 0.58%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	Married-Couple Family Poverty
Immigrants \| Germany	96.8 /100 \| #107	Exceptional 4.7%
Laotians	96.6 /100 \| #108	Exceptional 4.7%
Immigrants \| Hong Kong	96.4 /100 \| #109	Exceptional 4.7%
Immigrants \| Bolivia	96.2 /100 \| #110	Exceptional 4.7%
Pakistanis	96.2 /100 \| #111	Exceptional 4.7%
Tongans	95.9 /100 \| #112	Exceptional 4.7%
Immigrants \| Nepal	95.9 /100 \| #113	Exceptional 4.7%
Immigrants \| Indonesia	95.1 /100 \| #114	Exceptional 4.8%
Taiwanese	94.8 /100 \| #115	Exceptional 4.8%
Celtics	94.8 /100 \| #116	Exceptional 4.8%
Kenyans	94.7 /100 \| #117	Exceptional 4.8%
Immigrants \| Philippines	94.6 /100 \| #118	Exceptional 4.8%
Immigrants \| Eastern Asia	94.0 /100 \| #119	Exceptional 4.8%
Immigrants \| Southern Europe	93.4 /100 \| #120	Exceptional 4.8%
Indians (Asian)	93.2 /100 \| #121	Exceptional 4.8%
Whites/Caucasians	93.1 /100 \| #122	Exceptional 4.8%
Jordanians	93.1 /100 \| #123	Exceptional 4.8%
Romanians	92.5 /100 \| #124	Exceptional 4.8%
Immigrants \| Bosnia and Herzegovina	92.5 /100 \| #125	Exceptional 4.8%
Immigrants \| Asia	92.3 /100 \| #126	Exceptional 4.8%
Egyptians	92.0 /100 \| #127	Exceptional 4.8%