Latvian vs Bhutanese Married-Couple Family Poverty
COMPARE
Latvian
Bhutanese
Married-Couple Family Poverty
Married-Couple Family Poverty Comparison
Latvians
Bhutanese
3.9%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
7th/ 347
METRIC RANK
4.1%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
23rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Latvian vs Bhutanese Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 219,282,296 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Latvians and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.210 and weighted average of 3.9%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 450,291,687 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.217 and weighted average of 4.1%, a difference of 5.1%.
Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Latvian | Bhutanese |
| Minimum | 0.39% | 0.54% |
| Maximum | 26.5% | 49.5% |
| Range | 26.1% | 48.9% |
| Mean | 4.8% | 5.1% |
| Median | 3.8% | 3.7% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.9% | 2.4% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 5.9% | 5.4% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.0% | 3.0% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.0% | 6.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 3.9% | 6.7% |
Demographics Similar to Latvians and Bhutanese by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Latvians are Luxembourger (3.9%, a difference of 0.52%), Thai (3.9%, a difference of 0.54%), Croatian (3.9%, a difference of 0.98%), Carpatho Rusyn (3.9%, a difference of 1.0%), and Swedish (3.9%, a difference of 1.1%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Immigrants from Singapore (4.1%, a difference of 0.020%), Eastern European (4.1%, a difference of 0.23%), Zimbabwean (4.1%, a difference of 0.39%), Maltese (4.1%, a difference of 0.42%), and Immigrants from Ireland (4.1%, a difference of 0.66%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Swedes | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 3.9% |
| Luxembourgers | 100.0 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 3.9% |
| Latvians | 100.0 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 3.9% |
| Thais | 100.0 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 3.9% |
| Croatians | 100.0 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 3.9% |
| Carpatho Rusyns | 100.0 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 3.9% |
| Lithuanians | 100.0 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Bulgarians | 100.0 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Czechs | 100.0 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Slovaks | 100.0 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Poles | 100.0 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Germans | 100.0 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Italians | 100.0 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 4.0% |
| Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Zimbabweans | 99.9 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Immigrants | Singapore | 99.9 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.9 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 4.1% |
| Immigrants | Taiwan | 99.9 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 4.1% |