Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Venezuela Unemployment Among Ages 60 to 64 years

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 139,083,828 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and unemployment rate among population between the ages 60 and 64 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.061 and weighted average of 4.3%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 269,107,059 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Venezuela and unemployment rate among population between the ages 60 and 64 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.287 and weighted average of 4.5%, a difference of 3.3%.

Unemployment Among Ages 60 to 64 years Correlation Summary

Measurement	Chickasaw	Immigrants from Venezuela
Minimum	1.3%	1.3%
Maximum	47.6%	12.5%
Range	46.3%	11.2%
Mean	10.5%	4.7%
Median	6.0%	4.5%
Interquartile 25% (IQ1)	3.5%	3.0%
Interquartile 75% (IQ3)	15.0%	5.9%
Interquartile Range (IQR)	11.5%	2.9%
Standard Deviation (Sample)	11.6%	2.3%
Standard Deviation (Population)	11.4%	2.2%

Demographics Similar to Chickasaw and Immigrants from Venezuela by Unemployment Among Ages 60 to 64 years

In terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Immigrants from Cuba (4.3%, a difference of 0.050%), Norwegian (4.3%, a difference of 0.050%), Sudanese (4.3%, a difference of 0.55%), Danish (4.4%, a difference of 0.81%), and Immigrants from Afghanistan (4.4%, a difference of 0.97%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Venezuela are Cuban (4.5%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Eritrea (4.5%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Nepal (4.5%, a difference of 0.25%), Immigrants from Iraq (4.5%, a difference of 0.33%), and Czech (4.4%, a difference of 0.41%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	Unemployment Among Ages 60 to 64 years
Luxembourgers	100.0 /100 \| #11	Exceptional 4.3%
Immigrants \| Cuba	100.0 /100 \| #12	Exceptional 4.3%
Chickasaw	100.0 /100 \| #13	Exceptional 4.3%
Norwegians	100.0 /100 \| #14	Exceptional 4.3%
Sudanese	100.0 /100 \| #15	Exceptional 4.3%
Danes	100.0 /100 \| #16	Exceptional 4.4%
Immigrants \| Afghanistan	100.0 /100 \| #17	Exceptional 4.4%
Slovenes	100.0 /100 \| #18	Exceptional 4.4%
Tsimshian	100.0 /100 \| #19	Exceptional 4.4%
Afghans	100.0 /100 \| #20	Exceptional 4.4%
Immigrants \| Cabo Verde	100.0 /100 \| #21	Exceptional 4.4%
Cape Verdeans	100.0 /100 \| #22	Exceptional 4.4%
Immigrants \| Zaire	100.0 /100 \| #23	Exceptional 4.4%
Immigrants \| Burma/Myanmar	100.0 /100 \| #24	Exceptional 4.4%
Yugoslavians	100.0 /100 \| #25	Exceptional 4.4%
Czechs	100.0 /100 \| #26	Exceptional 4.4%
Immigrants \| Iraq	100.0 /100 \| #27	Exceptional 4.5%
Immigrants \| Nepal	100.0 /100 \| #28	Exceptional 4.5%
Cubans	100.0 /100 \| #29	Exceptional 4.5%
Immigrants \| Venezuela	100.0 /100 \| #30	Exceptional 4.5%
Immigrants \| Eritrea	100.0 /100 \| #31	Exceptional 4.5%