Pueblo vs Chickasaw Married-Couple Family Poverty
COMPARE
Pueblo
Chickasaw
Married-Couple Family Poverty
Married-Couple Family Poverty Comparison
Pueblo
Chickasaw
11.1%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
341st/ 347
METRIC RANK
5.8%
MARRIED-COUPLE FAMILY POVERTY
2.3/ 100
METRIC RATING
244th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Pueblo vs Chickasaw Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 119,779,377 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Pueblo and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.398 and weighted average of 11.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,342,221 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among married-couple families in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.056 and weighted average of 5.8%, a difference of 92.0%.
Married-Couple Family Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Pueblo | Chickasaw |
| Minimum | 0.23% | 1.7% |
| Maximum | 100.0% | 17.6% |
| Range | 99.8% | 16.0% |
| Mean | 20.5% | 7.8% |
| Median | 10.9% | 7.0% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.0% | 5.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 23.0% | 9.6% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 16.0% | 4.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 23.7% | 3.4% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 23.5% | 3.3% |
Similar Demographics by Married-Couple Family Poverty
Demographics Similar to Pueblo by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Pueblo are Tohono O'odham (11.2%, a difference of 0.93%), Pima (11.4%, a difference of 2.6%), Navajo (11.9%, a difference of 6.6%), Puerto Rican (12.6%, a difference of 13.7%), and Yuman (9.7%, a difference of 14.2%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Lumbee | 0.0 /100 | #333 | Tragic 8.3% |
| Immigrants | Dominican Republic | 0.0 /100 | #334 | Tragic 8.4% |
| Sioux | 0.0 /100 | #335 | Tragic 8.7% |
| Apache | 0.0 /100 | #336 | Tragic 9.0% |
| Yakama | 0.0 /100 | #337 | Tragic 9.0% |
| Cheyenne | 0.0 /100 | #338 | Tragic 9.4% |
| Crow | 0.0 /100 | #339 | Tragic 9.6% |
| Yuman | 0.0 /100 | #340 | Tragic 9.7% |
| Pueblo | 0.0 /100 | #341 | Tragic 11.1% |
| Tohono O'odham | 0.0 /100 | #342 | Tragic 11.2% |
| Pima | 0.0 /100 | #343 | Tragic 11.4% |
| Navajo | 0.0 /100 | #344 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Puerto Ricans | 0.0 /100 | #345 | Tragic 12.6% |
| Immigrants | Yemen | 0.0 /100 | #346 | Tragic 12.8% |
| Yup'ik | 0.0 /100 | #347 | Tragic 13.4% |
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Married-Couple Family Poverty
In terms of married-couple family poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Somali (5.8%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Afghanistan (5.8%, a difference of 0.15%), Immigrants from Western Africa (5.8%, a difference of 0.17%), Immigrants from Panama (5.8%, a difference of 0.26%), and Fijian (5.8%, a difference of 0.28%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Married-Couple Family Poverty |
| Immigrants | South America | 3.1 /100 | #237 | Tragic 5.7% |
| Cherokee | 2.7 /100 | #238 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Venezuelans | 2.7 /100 | #239 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Fijians | 2.5 /100 | #240 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Immigrants | Panama | 2.5 /100 | #241 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Immigrants | Western Africa | 2.4 /100 | #242 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Somalis | 2.3 /100 | #243 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Chickasaw | 2.3 /100 | #244 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Immigrants | Afghanistan | 2.1 /100 | #245 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Immigrants | Venezuela | 1.8 /100 | #246 | Tragic 5.8% |
| Iraqis | 1.4 /100 | #247 | Tragic 5.9% |
| Cree | 1.2 /100 | #248 | Tragic 5.9% |
| Tsimshian | 1.1 /100 | #249 | Tragic 5.9% |
| Immigrants | Eritrea | 1.1 /100 | #250 | Tragic 5.9% |
| Immigrants | Ghana | 1.0 /100 | #251 | Tragic 5.9% |