Ute Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
Ute
Select to Compare
Single Female Poverty
Ute Single Female Poverty
28.4%
POVERTY | SINGLE FEMALES
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
333rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Ute Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 55,519,789 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Ute and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.325 and weighted average of 28.4%. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Ute within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.25% in poverty level among single females.
It is essential to understand that the correlation between the percentage of Ute and poverty level among single females does not imply a direct cause-and-effect relationship. It remains uncertain whether the presence of Ute influences an upward or downward trend in the level of poverty level among single females within an area, or if Ute simply ended up residing in those areas with higher or lower levels of poverty level among single females due to other factors.
Demographics Similar to Ute by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Ute are Yakama (28.3%, a difference of 0.42%), Native/Alaskan (28.2%, a difference of 0.68%), Pueblo (28.6%, a difference of 0.73%), Hopi (28.0%, a difference of 1.3%), and Immigrants from Yemen (28.9%, a difference of 1.9%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
| Creek | 0.0 /100 | #326 | Tragic 27.4% |
| Dutch West Indians | 0.0 /100 | #327 | Tragic 27.5% |
| Apache | 0.0 /100 | #328 | Tragic 27.7% |
| Menominee | 0.0 /100 | #329 | Tragic 27.8% |
| Hopi | 0.0 /100 | #330 | Tragic 28.0% |
| Natives/Alaskans | 0.0 /100 | #331 | Tragic 28.2% |
| Yakama | 0.0 /100 | #332 | Tragic 28.3% |
| Ute | 0.0 /100 | #333 | Tragic 28.4% |
| Pueblo | 0.0 /100 | #334 | Tragic 28.6% |
| Immigrants from Yemen | 0.0 /100 | #335 | Tragic 28.9% |
| Colville | 0.0 /100 | #336 | Tragic 29.1% |
| Yuman | 0.0 /100 | #337 | Tragic 29.4% |
| Pima | 0.0 /100 | #338 | Tragic 30.3% |
| Cheyenne | 0.0 /100 | #339 | Tragic 30.4% |
| Cajuns | 0.0 /100 | #340 | Tragic 30.6% |
Ute Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Ute Data | Single Female Poverty Data |
| Minimum | 0.028% | 18.0% |
| Maximum | 96.2% | 100.0% |
| Range | 96.2% | 82.0% |
| Mean | 22.3% | 43.7% |
| Median | 6.3% | 37.5% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.7% | 27.4% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 42.4% | 43.8% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 39.7% | 16.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 30.3% | 23.4% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 29.6% | 22.9% |
Correlation Details
| Ute Percentile | Sample Size | Single Female Poverty |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.028% | 55,137,699 | 22.3% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.68% | 225,747 | 35.6% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.22% | 55,786 | 28.2% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.67% | 9,958 | 27.9% |
[ 2.0% - 2.5% ] 2.33% | 49,305 | 26.5% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.73% | 951 | 27.4% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.36% | 387 | 21.7% |
[ 4.0% - 4.5% ] 4.09% | 2,004 | 42.1% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.85% | 8,346 | 41.7% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.13% | 1,151 | 70.2% |
[ 5.5% - 6.0% ] 5.71% | 14,181 | 33.2% |
[ 6.5% - 7.0% ] 6.81% | 470 | 100.0% |
[ 7.5% - 8.0% ] 7.81% | 1,754 | 42.7% |
[ 8.0% - 8.5% ] 8.33% | 1,285 | 18.0% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.76% | 5,495 | 27.0% |
[ 16.0% - 16.5% ] 16.07% | 616 | 33.3% |
[ 42.0% - 42.5% ] 42.40% | 283 | 74.2% |
[ 52.0% - 52.5% ] 52.36% | 191 | 100.0% |
[ 67.5% - 68.0% ] 67.87% | 831 | 43.8% |
[ 71.0% - 71.5% ] 71.25% | 1,186 | 61.5% |
[ 78.0% - 78.5% ] 78.06% | 1,691 | 39.4% |
[ 96.0% - 96.5% ] 96.19% | 472 | 43.8% |