Immigrants from Nicaragua vs South African 1 or more Vehicles in Household

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 236,317,806 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Nicaragua and percentage of households with 1 or more vehicles available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.099 and weighted average of 90.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 182,559,953 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of South Africans and percentage of households with 1 or more vehicles available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.494 and weighted average of 90.0%, a difference of 0.14%.

1 or more Vehicles in Household Correlation Summary

Measurement	Immigrants from Nicaragua	South African
Minimum	74.4%	88.0%
Maximum	100.0%	100.0%
Range	25.6%	12.0%
Mean	92.0%	95.8%
Median	92.2%	95.1%
Interquartile 25% (IQ1)	89.7%	93.5%
Interquartile 75% (IQ3)	95.9%	99.4%
Interquartile Range (IQR)	6.2%	5.9%
Standard Deviation (Sample)	5.8%	3.2%
Standard Deviation (Population)	5.8%	3.2%

Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Nicaragua and South Africans by 1 or more Vehicles in Household

In terms of 1 or more vehicles in household, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Nicaragua are Immigrants from Micronesia (90.1%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Eastern Africa (90.1%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Bosnia and Herzegovina (90.1%, a difference of 0.030%), Tlingit-Haida (90.1%, a difference of 0.050%), and New Zealander (90.1%, a difference of 0.060%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to South Africans are Brazilian (90.0%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Indonesia (90.0%, a difference of 0.020%), Salvadoran (90.0%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Congo (90.0%, a difference of 0.030%), and Australian (90.0%, a difference of 0.050%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	1 or more Vehicles in Household
Immigrants \| Zimbabwe	81.5 /100 \| #144	Excellent 90.2%
Sioux	81.3 /100 \| #145	Excellent 90.2%
Bahamians	80.5 /100 \| #146	Excellent 90.2%
Chileans	79.8 /100 \| #147	Good 90.2%
Immigrants \| Eastern Africa	78.2 /100 \| #148	Good 90.1%
Immigrants \| Nicaragua	76.7 /100 \| #149	Good 90.1%
Immigrants \| Micronesia	75.9 /100 \| #150	Good 90.1%
Immigrants \| Bosnia and Herzegovina	75.4 /100 \| #151	Good 90.1%
Tlingit-Haida	74.3 /100 \| #152	Good 90.1%
New Zealanders	73.8 /100 \| #153	Good 90.1%
Immigrants \| Uganda	73.8 /100 \| #154	Good 90.1%
Immigrants \| Immigrants	73.6 /100 \| #155	Good 90.1%
Australians	72.4 /100 \| #156	Good 90.0%
Immigrants \| Congo	71.2 /100 \| #157	Good 90.0%
Brazilians	71.0 /100 \| #158	Good 90.0%
South Africans	69.7 /100 \| #159	Good 90.0%
Immigrants \| Indonesia	68.8 /100 \| #160	Good 90.0%
Salvadorans	68.7 /100 \| #161	Good 90.0%
Spanish American Indians	67.0 /100 \| #162	Good 89.9%
Immigrants \| Austria	65.5 /100 \| #163	Good 89.9%
Comanche	63.4 /100 \| #164	Good 89.9%