Thai vs Luxembourger Poverty
COMPARE
Thai
Luxembourger
Poverty
Poverty Comparison
Thais
Luxembourgers
9.6%
POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
3rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.6%
POVERTY
99.7/ 100
METRIC RATING
21st/ 347
METRIC RANK
Thai vs Luxembourger Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 475,359,264 people shows a significant negative correlation between the proportion of Thais and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.624 and weighted average of 9.6%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 144,648,044 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Luxembourgers and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.268 and weighted average of 10.6%, a difference of 10.3%.
Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Thai | Luxembourger |
Minimum | 0.80% | 1.6% |
Maximum | 15.1% | 19.5% |
Range | 14.4% | 17.9% |
Mean | 6.4% | 7.5% |
Median | 5.9% | 6.8% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.4% | 4.8% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.2% | 8.3% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.9% | 3.5% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 2.8% | 3.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 2.8% | 3.9% |
Demographics Similar to Thais and Luxembourgers by Poverty
In terms of poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Thais are Chinese (9.5%, a difference of 0.45%), Immigrants from Taiwan (9.7%, a difference of 1.5%), Immigrants from Ireland (10.1%, a difference of 5.2%), Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac (10.1%, a difference of 5.3%), and Filipino (10.1%, a difference of 5.5%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Luxembourgers are Immigrants from North Macedonia (10.6%, a difference of 0.080%), Eastern European (10.6%, a difference of 0.16%), Immigrants from Scotland (10.6%, a difference of 0.19%), Latvian (10.5%, a difference of 0.58%), and Norwegian (10.5%, a difference of 0.68%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Poverty |
Chinese | 100.0 /100 | #2 | Exceptional 9.5% |
Thais | 100.0 /100 | #3 | Exceptional 9.6% |
Immigrants | Taiwan | 100.0 /100 | #4 | Exceptional 9.7% |
Immigrants | Ireland | 99.9 /100 | #5 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Assyrians/Chaldeans/Syriacs | 99.9 /100 | #6 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Filipinos | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 10.3% |
Bhutanese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 10.4% |
Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 10.5% |
Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 10.5% |
Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 10.5% |
Immigrants | Scotland | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Immigrants | North Macedonia | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Luxembourgers | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 10.6% |
Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 10.6% |