Iranian vs Slavic Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Iranian
Slavic
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Comparison
Iranians
Slavs
12.4%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
8th/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.7%
CHILD POVERTY AMONG GIRLS UNDER 16
83.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
147th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Iranian vs Slavic Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 311,679,854 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Iranians and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.060 and weighted average of 12.4%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 266,780,772 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Slavs and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.742 and weighted average of 15.7%, a difference of 26.6%.

Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
Measurement | Iranian | Slavic |
Minimum | 0.88% | 0.51% |
Maximum | 18.0% | 80.7% |
Range | 17.1% | 80.2% |
Mean | 8.2% | 23.6% |
Median | 7.7% | 18.5% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 5.2% | 14.0% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 10.5% | 28.6% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.3% | 14.6% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.2% | 15.8% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.2% | 15.6% |
Similar Demographics by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Demographics Similar to Iranians by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Iranians are Immigrants from Singapore (12.5%, a difference of 0.43%), Chinese (12.3%, a difference of 0.53%), Immigrants from Hong Kong (12.3%, a difference of 0.66%), Immigrants from Iran (12.6%, a difference of 1.4%), and Immigrants from South Central Asia (12.7%, a difference of 2.6%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
Immigrants | India | 100.0 /100 | #1 | Exceptional 11.0% |
Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 11.3% |
Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 11.4% |
Tsimshian | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 11.5% |
Thais | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 11.8% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 100.0 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 12.3% |
Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 12.3% |
Iranians | 100.0 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 12.4% |
Immigrants | Singapore | 100.0 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 12.5% |
Immigrants | Iran | 100.0 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 12.6% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 100.0 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 12.7% |
Bhutanese | 100.0 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 12.7% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 12.9% |
Burmese | 99.9 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 13.0% |
Okinawans | 99.9 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 13.0% |
Demographics Similar to Slavs by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Slavs are Icelander (15.7%, a difference of 0.15%), Samoan (15.7%, a difference of 0.23%), Immigrants from Hungary (15.8%, a difference of 0.46%), Immigrants from Albania (15.8%, a difference of 0.50%), and Welsh (15.6%, a difference of 0.53%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
New Zealanders | 87.2 /100 | #140 | Excellent 15.6% |
Immigrants | Jordan | 87.2 /100 | #141 | Excellent 15.6% |
Canadians | 87.1 /100 | #142 | Excellent 15.6% |
Immigrants | Peru | 86.6 /100 | #143 | Excellent 15.6% |
Israelis | 86.3 /100 | #144 | Excellent 15.6% |
Welsh | 85.4 /100 | #145 | Excellent 15.6% |
Samoans | 84.2 /100 | #146 | Excellent 15.7% |
Slavs | 83.1 /100 | #147 | Excellent 15.7% |
Icelanders | 82.4 /100 | #148 | Excellent 15.7% |
Immigrants | Hungary | 80.9 /100 | #149 | Excellent 15.8% |
Immigrants | Albania | 80.7 /100 | #150 | Excellent 15.8% |
Venezuelans | 80.1 /100 | #151 | Excellent 15.8% |
Immigrants | Kuwait | 79.4 /100 | #152 | Good 15.8% |
Immigrants | Nepal | 78.5 /100 | #153 | Good 15.9% |
Immigrants | Chile | 76.7 /100 | #154 | Good 15.9% |