Latvian vs Immigrants from Congo No Vehicles in Household
COMPARE
Latvian
Immigrants from Congo
No Vehicles in Household
No Vehicles in Household Comparison
Latvians
Immigrants from Congo
9.8%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
85.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
135th/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.1%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
73.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
152nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
Latvian vs Immigrants from Congo No Vehicles in Household Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 220,382,965 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Latvians and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.015 and weighted average of 9.8%. Similarly, 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%, a difference of 2.7%.
No Vehicles in Household Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Latvian | Immigrants from Congo |
| Minimum | 0.54% | 0.81% |
| Maximum | 28.8% | 31.7% |
| Range | 28.3% | 30.9% |
| Mean | 7.0% | 10.2% |
| Median | 5.3% | 9.2% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.1% | 6.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.8% | 12.1% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 5.7% | 5.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.1% | 5.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.1% | 5.2% |
Demographics Similar to Latvians and Immigrants from Congo by No Vehicles in Household
In terms of no vehicles in household, the demographic groups most similar to Latvians are Immigrants from South Africa (9.8%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Moldova (9.8%, a difference of 0.15%), Estonian (9.8%, a difference of 0.27%), Marshallese (9.8%, a difference of 0.31%), and Immigrants from Lithuania (9.8%, a difference of 0.32%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Congo are Tlingit-Haida (10.1%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from Eastern Africa (10.0%, a difference of 0.14%), Colombian (10.0%, a difference of 0.15%), Immigrants from Uganda (10.0%, a difference of 0.56%), and Immigrants from Bosnia and Herzegovina (9.9%, a difference of 1.2%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | No Vehicles in Household |
| Immigrants | Oceania | 87.1 /100 | #133 | Excellent 9.7% |
| Syrians | 87.1 /100 | #134 | Excellent 9.7% |
| Latvians | 85.1 /100 | #135 | Excellent 9.8% |
| Immigrants | South Africa | 85.0 /100 | #136 | Excellent 9.8% |
| 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% |