Japanese vs Marshallese Female Poverty
COMPARE
Japanese
Marshallese
Female Poverty
Female Poverty Comparison
Japanese
Marshallese
14.5%
FEMALE POVERTY
4.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
219th/ 347
METRIC RANK
14.4%
FEMALE POVERTY
5.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
214th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Japanese vs Marshallese Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 249,060,032 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Japanese and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.648 and weighted average of 14.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 14,760,991 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Marshallese and poverty level among females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.288 and weighted average of 14.4%, a difference of 0.46%.
Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Japanese | Marshallese |
Minimum | 4.1% | 6.9% |
Maximum | 100.0% | 21.1% |
Range | 95.9% | 14.2% |
Mean | 21.0% | 14.6% |
Median | 16.0% | 14.4% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 14.2% | 11.9% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 22.7% | 18.5% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 8.6% | 6.6% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 16.8% | 3.9% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 16.7% | 3.8% |
Demographics Similar to Japanese and Marshallese by Female Poverty
In terms of female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Japanese are Alsatian (14.5%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Uzbekistan (14.4%, a difference of 0.14%), Immigrants (14.4%, a difference of 0.19%), Immigrants from Thailand (14.4%, a difference of 0.22%), and Immigrants from Cambodia (14.5%, a difference of 0.24%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Marshallese are Immigrants from Panama (14.4%, a difference of 0.15%), Alaskan Athabascan (14.4%, a difference of 0.16%), Immigrants from Thailand (14.4%, a difference of 0.23%), Bermudan (14.4%, a difference of 0.24%), and Immigrants (14.4%, a difference of 0.27%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Female Poverty |
Immigrants | Uruguay | 14.0 /100 | #206 | Poor 14.0% |
Immigrants | Eastern Africa | 9.0 /100 | #207 | Tragic 14.2% |
Immigrants | Azores | 7.9 /100 | #208 | Tragic 14.2% |
Panamanians | 7.7 /100 | #209 | Tragic 14.2% |
Malaysians | 7.4 /100 | #210 | Tragic 14.3% |
Moroccans | 7.2 /100 | #211 | Tragic 14.3% |
Bermudans | 5.5 /100 | #212 | Tragic 14.4% |
Alaskan Athabascans | 5.3 /100 | #213 | Tragic 14.4% |
Marshallese | 5.0 /100 | #214 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Panama | 4.7 /100 | #215 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Thailand | 4.5 /100 | #216 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Immigrants | 4.5 /100 | #217 | Tragic 14.4% |
Immigrants | Uzbekistan | 4.4 /100 | #218 | Tragic 14.4% |
Japanese | 4.1 /100 | #219 | Tragic 14.5% |
Alsatians | 4.0 /100 | #220 | Tragic 14.5% |
Immigrants | Cambodia | 3.7 /100 | #221 | Tragic 14.5% |
Immigrants | Nonimmigrants | 3.7 /100 | #222 | Tragic 14.5% |
Immigrants | Africa | 3.3 /100 | #223 | Tragic 14.5% |
Americans | 2.8 /100 | #224 | Tragic 14.6% |
Immigrants | Micronesia | 2.8 /100 | #225 | Tragic 14.6% |
Immigrants | Eritrea | 2.4 /100 | #226 | Tragic 14.6% |