Osage vs Immigrants from Oceania Married-Couple Family Poverty
COMPARE
Osage
Immigrants from Oceania
Married-Couple Family Poverty
Married-Couple Family Poverty Comparison
Osage
Immigrants from Oceania
5.4%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
18.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
206th/ 347
METRIC RANK
5.0%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
78.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
149th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Osage vs Immigrants from Oceania Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 91,686,169 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Osage and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.656 and weighted average of 5.4%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 303,370,151 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Oceania and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.099 and weighted average of 5.0%, a difference of 8.4%.
Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Osage | Immigrants from Oceania |
| Minimum | 0.88% | 1.0% |
| Maximum | 28.6% | 12.9% |
| Range | 27.7% | 11.9% |
| Mean | 7.1% | 6.0% |
| Median | 5.3% | 5.1% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.7% | 4.2% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 7.6% | 7.4% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.9% | 3.2% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.0% | 2.8% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.9% | 2.7% |
Similar Demographics by Married-Couple Family Poverty
Demographics Similar to Osage by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Osage are Chippewa (5.4%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Africa (5.5%, a difference of 0.14%), Immigrants from Costa Rica (5.4%, a difference of 0.19%), French American Indian (5.5%, a difference of 0.45%), and Immigrants from Syria (5.5%, a difference of 0.59%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Uruguayans | 25.0 /100 | #199 | Fair 5.4% |
| Immigrants | Morocco | 24.3 /100 | #200 | Fair 5.4% |
| Lebanese | 24.1 /100 | #201 | Fair 5.4% |
| Immigrants | Middle Africa | 23.8 /100 | #202 | Fair 5.4% |
| Immigrants | Peru | 21.8 /100 | #203 | Fair 5.4% |
| Immigrants | Costa Rica | 19.4 /100 | #204 | Poor 5.4% |
| Chippewa | 18.9 /100 | #205 | Poor 5.4% |
| Osage | 18.4 /100 | #206 | Poor 5.4% |
| Immigrants | Africa | 17.6 /100 | #207 | Poor 5.5% |
| French American Indians | 16.1 /100 | #208 | Poor 5.5% |
| Immigrants | Syria | 15.4 /100 | #209 | Poor 5.5% |
| Immigrants | Micronesia | 14.4 /100 | #210 | Poor 5.5% |
| Nigerians | 14.3 /100 | #211 | Poor 5.5% |
| Immigrants | Thailand | 14.0 /100 | #212 | Poor 5.5% |
| Immigrants | Liberia | 13.3 /100 | #213 | Poor 5.5% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Oceania by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Oceania are Syrian (5.0%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Russia (5.0%, a difference of 0.030%), Brazilian (5.0%, a difference of 0.050%), Mongolian (5.0%, a difference of 0.22%), and Immigrants from Cameroon (5.0%, a difference of 0.23%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Immigrants | China | 84.6 /100 | #142 | Excellent 5.0% |
| Immigrants | Egypt | 83.4 /100 | #143 | Excellent 5.0% |
| Hmong | 83.2 /100 | #144 | Excellent 5.0% |
| Immigrants | Spain | 79.9 /100 | #145 | Good 5.0% |
| Mongolians | 79.8 /100 | #146 | Good 5.0% |
| Syrians | 78.7 /100 | #147 | Good 5.0% |
| Immigrants | Russia | 78.7 /100 | #148 | Good 5.0% |
| Immigrants | Oceania | 78.6 /100 | #149 | Good 5.0% |
| Brazilians | 78.3 /100 | #150 | Good 5.0% |
| Immigrants | Cameroon | 77.3 /100 | #151 | Good 5.0% |
| Albanians | 77.2 /100 | #152 | Good 5.0% |
| Immigrants | Kuwait | 76.3 /100 | #153 | Good 5.0% |
| Delaware | 73.7 /100 | #154 | Good 5.1% |
| Immigrants | Ethiopia | 72.4 /100 | #155 | Good 5.1% |
| Sri Lankans | 72.2 /100 | #156 | Good 5.1% |