Immigrants from Congo vs Chilean No Vehicles in Household
COMPARE
Immigrants from Congo
Chilean
No Vehicles in Household
No Vehicles in Household Comparison
Immigrants from Congo
Chileans
10.1%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
73.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
152nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
9.9%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
81.2/ 100
METRIC RATING
143rd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from Congo vs Chilean No Vehicles in Household Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 92,060,649 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Congo and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.198 and weighted average of 10.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 256,325,892 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Chileans and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.070 and weighted average of 9.9%, a difference of 1.7%.
No Vehicles in Household Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from Congo | Chilean |
| Minimum | 0.81% | 1.7% |
| Maximum | 31.7% | 18.4% |
| Range | 30.9% | 16.7% |
| Mean | 10.2% | 7.6% |
| Median | 9.2% | 7.5% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 6.5% | 4.4% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 12.1% | 9.9% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.7% | 5.4% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.3% | 4.0% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.2% | 3.9% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Congo and Chileans by No Vehicles in Household
In terms of no vehicles in household, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Congo are Tlingit-Haida (10.1%, a difference of 0.090%), Sioux (10.1%, a difference of 0.11%), Salvadoran (10.1%, a difference of 0.12%), Immigrants from Eastern Africa (10.0%, a difference of 0.14%), and Colombian (10.0%, a difference of 0.15%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Chileans are Immigrants from Bahamas (9.9%, a difference of 0.0%), Bahamian (9.9%, a difference of 0.030%), Hungarian (9.9%, a difference of 0.26%), Immigrants from Nicaragua (9.9%, a difference of 0.31%), and Immigrants from Zimbabwe (9.9%, a difference of 0.35%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | No Vehicles in Household |
| Immigrants | Moldova | 84.6 /100 | #137 | Excellent 9.8% |
| Estonians | 84.2 /100 | #138 | Excellent 9.8% |
| Marshallese | 84.0 /100 | #139 | Excellent 9.8% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 84.0 /100 | #140 | Excellent 9.8% |
| 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% |