Australian vs Bahamian No Vehicles in Household
COMPARE
Australian
Bahamian
No Vehicles in Household
No Vehicles in Household Comparison
Australians
Bahamians
10.1%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
70.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
157th/ 347
METRIC RANK
9.9%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
81.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
145th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Australian vs Bahamian No Vehicles in Household Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 223,715,583 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Australians and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.241 and weighted average of 10.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 112,549,845 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Bahamians and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.221 and weighted average of 9.9%, a difference of 2.1%.
No Vehicles in Household Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Australian | Bahamian |
| Minimum | 0.57% | 1.4% |
| Maximum | 22.8% | 21.9% |
| Range | 22.2% | 20.5% |
| Mean | 7.1% | 9.3% |
| Median | 6.3% | 8.7% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 4.5% | 7.3% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.5% | 10.2% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.0% | 2.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.4% | 4.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.3% | 4.0% |
Demographics Similar to Australians and Bahamians by No Vehicles in Household
In terms of no vehicles in household, the demographic groups most similar to Australians are Immigrants from Micronesia (10.1%, a difference of 0.050%), Spanish American Indian (10.1%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Indonesia (10.1%, a difference of 0.21%), Salvadoran (10.1%, a difference of 0.30%), and Sioux (10.1%, a difference of 0.31%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bahamians are Chilean (9.9%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Bahamas (9.9%, a difference of 0.030%), Hungarian (9.9%, a difference of 0.23%), Immigrants from Nicaragua (9.9%, a difference of 0.28%), and Immigrants from Zimbabwe (9.9%, a difference of 0.38%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | No Vehicles in Household |
| Sudanese | 83.1 /100 | #141 | Excellent 9.8% |
| Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 82.6 /100 | #142 | Excellent 9.9% |
| Chileans | 81.2 /100 | #143 | Excellent 9.9% |
| Immigrants | Bahamas | 81.2 /100 | #144 | Excellent 9.9% |
| Bahamians | 81.0 /100 | #145 | Excellent 9.9% |
| Hungarians | 80.0 /100 | #146 | Excellent 9.9% |
| Immigrants | Nicaragua | 79.8 /100 | #147 | Good 9.9% |
| Immigrants | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 79.1 /100 | #148 | Good 9.9% |
| Immigrants | Uganda | 76.1 /100 | #149 | Good 10.0% |
| Colombians | 73.9 /100 | #150 | Good 10.0% |
| Immigrants | Eastern Africa | 73.8 /100 | #151 | Good 10.0% |
| Immigrants | Congo | 73.0 /100 | #152 | Good 10.1% |
| Tlingit-Haida | 72.5 /100 | #153 | Good 10.1% |
| Sioux | 72.4 /100 | #154 | Good 10.1% |
| Salvadorans | 72.4 /100 | #155 | Good 10.1% |
| Immigrants | Micronesia | 70.9 /100 | #156 | Good 10.1% |
| Australians | 70.6 /100 | #157 | Good 10.1% |
| Spanish American Indians | 70.2 /100 | #158 | Good 10.1% |
| Immigrants | Indonesia | 69.3 /100 | #159 | Good 10.1% |
| Immigrants | Middle Africa | 65.7 /100 | #160 | Good 10.2% |
| New Zealanders | 65.1 /100 | #161 | Good 10.2% |