Norwegian vs Latvian Poverty
COMPARE
Norwegian
Latvian
Poverty
Poverty Comparison
Norwegians
Latvians
10.5%
POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
17th/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.5%
POVERTY
99.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
18th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Norwegian vs Latvian Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 532,786,336 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Norwegians and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.117 and weighted average of 10.5%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 220,650,145 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Latvians and poverty level in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.396 and weighted average of 10.5%, a difference of 0.10%.
Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Norwegian | Latvian |
| Minimum | 0.40% | 1.8% |
| Maximum | 41.5% | 52.6% |
| Range | 41.1% | 50.7% |
| Mean | 10.4% | 9.9% |
| Median | 9.8% | 8.8% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 8.1% | 6.1% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 11.2% | 12.5% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.0% | 6.4% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.0% | 7.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.0% | 7.3% |
Demographics Similar to Norwegians and Latvians by Poverty
In terms of poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Norwegians are Lithuanian (10.5%, a difference of 0.37%), Immigrants from Scotland (10.6%, a difference of 0.49%), Immigrants from North Macedonia (10.6%, a difference of 0.60%), Bolivian (10.4%, a difference of 0.67%), and Immigrants from Bolivia (10.4%, a difference of 0.68%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Latvians are Immigrants from Scotland (10.6%, a difference of 0.39%), Lithuanian (10.5%, a difference of 0.46%), Immigrants from North Macedonia (10.6%, a difference of 0.51%), Luxembourger (10.6%, a difference of 0.58%), and Eastern European (10.6%, a difference of 0.74%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Poverty |
| Filipinos | 99.9 /100 | #7 | Exceptional 10.1% |
| Maltese | 99.9 /100 | #8 | Exceptional 10.2% |
| Immigrants | South Central Asia | 99.9 /100 | #9 | Exceptional 10.2% |
| Bulgarians | 99.9 /100 | #10 | Exceptional 10.2% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 99.9 /100 | #11 | Exceptional 10.3% |
| Bhutanese | 99.8 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Immigrants | Hong Kong | 99.8 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Immigrants | Bolivia | 99.8 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Bolivians | 99.8 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 10.4% |
| Lithuanians | 99.8 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Norwegians | 99.8 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Latvians | 99.8 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 10.5% |
| Immigrants | Scotland | 99.7 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Immigrants | North Macedonia | 99.7 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Luxembourgers | 99.7 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Eastern Europeans | 99.7 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Swedes | 99.7 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Italians | 99.7 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Croatians | 99.6 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 10.6% |
| Burmese | 99.6 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 10.7% |
| Immigrants | Northern Europe | 99.6 /100 | #27 | Exceptional 10.7% |