Luxembourger vs Bhutanese Family Poverty
COMPARE
Luxembourger
Bhutanese
Family Poverty
Family Poverty Comparison
Luxembourgers
Bhutanese
7.2%
FAMILY POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
17th/ 347
METRIC RANK
7.0%
FAMILY POVERTY
99.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
8th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Luxembourger vs Bhutanese Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 144,473,448 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Luxembourgers and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.019 and weighted average of 7.2%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 453,917,990 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese and poverty level among families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.160 and weighted average of 7.0%, a difference of 2.4%.
Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Luxembourger | Bhutanese |
| Minimum | 0.32% | 1.3% |
| Maximum | 13.1% | 49.5% |
| Range | 12.7% | 48.2% |
| Mean | 5.5% | 7.3% |
| Median | 4.9% | 5.9% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.4% | 4.1% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 7.0% | 8.9% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.6% | 4.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 2.8% | 5.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 2.8% | 5.8% |
Demographics Similar to Luxembourgers and Bhutanese by Family Poverty
In terms of family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Luxembourgers are Immigrants from Lithuania (7.2%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from South Central Asia (7.2%, a difference of 0.22%), Eastern European (7.2%, a difference of 0.31%), Immigrants from Hong Kong (7.3%, a difference of 0.48%), and Lithuanian (7.2%, a difference of 0.50%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bhutanese are Latvian (7.1%, a difference of 0.44%), Bulgarian (7.1%, a difference of 0.70%), Immigrants from Singapore (7.1%, a difference of 0.71%), Immigrants from Ireland (7.0%, a difference of 0.91%), and Maltese (7.1%, a difference of 1.0%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Family Poverty |
| Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 6.5% |
| Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 6.6% |
| Filipinos | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 6.6% |
| Thais | 100.0 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 6.7% |
| Norwegians | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 6.9% |
| Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 7.0% |
| Bhutanese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 7.0% |
| Latvians | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Bulgarians | 99.8 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Immigrants | Singapore | 99.8 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Maltese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Swedes | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Iranians | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 7.1% |
| Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 7.2% |
| Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 7.2% |
| Luxembourgers | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 7.2% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 7.2% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 7.2% |
| Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 7.3% |
| Immigrants | Iran | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 7.3% |
| Danes | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 7.3% |