Irish vs Yugoslavian Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
Irish
Yugoslavian
Single Female Poverty
Single Female Poverty Comparison
Irish
Yugoslavians
21.4%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
21.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
200th/ 347
METRIC RANK
21.2%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
35.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
188th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Irish vs Yugoslavian Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 557,675,928 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Irish and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.662 and weighted average of 21.4%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 282,795,313 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Yugoslavians and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.236 and weighted average of 21.2%, a difference of 1.1%.
Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Irish | Yugoslavian |
Minimum | 7.7% | 2.0% |
Maximum | 100.0% | 50.2% |
Range | 92.3% | 48.2% |
Mean | 34.3% | 22.1% |
Median | 21.2% | 20.5% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 17.4% | 17.0% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 34.5% | 23.9% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 17.1% | 7.0% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 28.5% | 10.4% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 28.4% | 10.3% |
Demographics Similar to Irish and Yugoslavians by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Irish are Nigerian (21.4%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants (21.4%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Kenya (21.4%, a difference of 0.070%), Swiss (21.4%, a difference of 0.25%), and Immigrants from Haiti (21.5%, a difference of 0.25%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Yugoslavians are Immigrants from Cuba (21.2%, a difference of 0.010%), Trinidadian and Tobagonian (21.2%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Nigeria (21.2%, a difference of 0.090%), Hawaiian (21.2%, a difference of 0.15%), and Immigrants from Cambodia (21.2%, a difference of 0.19%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
Hungarians | 39.6 /100 | #184 | Fair 21.1% |
Immigrants | Cambodia | 38.2 /100 | #185 | Fair 21.2% |
Hawaiians | 37.7 /100 | #186 | Fair 21.2% |
Immigrants | Nigeria | 36.8 /100 | #187 | Fair 21.2% |
Yugoslavians | 35.4 /100 | #188 | Fair 21.2% |
Immigrants | Cuba | 35.3 /100 | #189 | Fair 21.2% |
Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 35.2 /100 | #190 | Fair 21.2% |
Immigrants | Germany | 31.1 /100 | #191 | Fair 21.3% |
Immigrants | Jamaica | 30.5 /100 | #192 | Fair 21.3% |
Basques | 28.1 /100 | #193 | Fair 21.3% |
Czechoslovakians | 27.7 /100 | #194 | Fair 21.3% |
Nicaraguans | 27.6 /100 | #195 | Fair 21.3% |
Immigrants | Saudi Arabia | 27.1 /100 | #196 | Fair 21.3% |
Japanese | 26.4 /100 | #197 | Fair 21.3% |
Swiss | 24.2 /100 | #198 | Fair 21.4% |
Immigrants | Immigrants | 22.0 /100 | #199 | Fair 21.4% |
Irish | 21.4 /100 | #200 | Fair 21.4% |
Nigerians | 20.9 /100 | #201 | Fair 21.4% |
Immigrants | Kenya | 20.7 /100 | #202 | Fair 21.4% |
Immigrants | Haiti | 18.8 /100 | #203 | Poor 21.5% |
Immigrants | Africa | 16.7 /100 | #204 | Poor 21.5% |