Mexican American Indian vs Chickasaw Female Poverty
COMPARE
Mexican American Indian
Chickasaw
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Mexican American Indians
Chickasaw
15.6%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
262nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
15.9%
FEMALE POVERTY
0.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
270th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Mexican American Indian vs Chickasaw Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 317,470,286 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Mexican American Indians and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.224 and weighted average of 15.6%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,658,289 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.004 and weighted average of 15.9%, a difference of 1.6%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Mexican American Indian | Chickasaw |
| Minimum | 0.49% | 1.9% |
| Maximum | 68.4% | 38.6% |
| Range | 67.9% | 36.7% |
| Mean | 17.6% | 18.1% |
| Median | 16.8% | 17.3% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 14.7% | 14.6% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 20.5% | 20.7% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.8% | 6.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 11.5% | 5.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 11.4% | 5.9% |
Demographics Similar to Mexican American Indians and Chickasaw by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Mexican American Indians are Guyanese (15.6%, a difference of 0.0%), Cherokee (15.6%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Guyana (15.6%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Ecuador (15.6%, a difference of 0.14%), and Cape Verdean (15.6%, a difference of 0.18%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Iroquois (15.8%, a difference of 0.26%), Immigrants from St. Vincent and the Grenadines (15.9%, a difference of 0.28%), Belizean (15.9%, a difference of 0.50%), Haitian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%), and Barbadian (15.9%, a difference of 0.51%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
| Jamaicans | 0.2 /100 | #256 | Tragic 15.5% |
| Immigrants | Jamaica | 0.1 /100 | #257 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Shoshone | 0.1 /100 | #258 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Cape Verdeans | 0.1 /100 | #259 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Immigrants | Guyana | 0.1 /100 | #260 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Guyanese | 0.1 /100 | #261 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Mexican American Indians | 0.1 /100 | #262 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Cherokee | 0.1 /100 | #263 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Immigrants | Ecuador | 0.1 /100 | #264 | Tragic 15.6% |
| Immigrants | Liberia | 0.1 /100 | #265 | Tragic 15.7% |
| Immigrants | El Salvador | 0.1 /100 | #266 | Tragic 15.7% |
| Sub-Saharan Africans | 0.1 /100 | #267 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Immigrants | Nicaragua | 0.1 /100 | #268 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Iroquois | 0.1 /100 | #269 | Tragic 15.8% |
| Chickasaw | 0.1 /100 | #270 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Immigrants | St. Vincent and the Grenadines | 0.0 /100 | #271 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Belizeans | 0.0 /100 | #272 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Haitians | 0.0 /100 | #273 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Barbadians | 0.0 /100 | #274 | Tragic 15.9% |
| Immigrants | Barbados | 0.0 /100 | #275 | Tragic 16.0% |
| Central Americans | 0.0 /100 | #276 | Tragic 16.0% |