Chinese vs Bahamian Male Disability
COMPARE
Chinese
Bahamian
Male Disability
Male Disability Comparison
Chinese
Bahamians
12.1%
MALE DISABILITY
0.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
255th/ 347
METRIC RANK
11.9%
MALE DISABILITY
1.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
241st/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chinese vs Bahamian Male Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 64,802,721 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese and percentage of males with a disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.226 and weighted average of 12.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 112,681,735 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Bahamians and percentage of males with a disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.338 and weighted average of 11.9%, a difference of 1.3%.
Male Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Chinese | Bahamian |
| Minimum | 1.3% | 4.5% |
| Maximum | 31.9% | 29.9% |
| Range | 30.7% | 25.4% |
| Mean | 13.4% | 12.6% |
| Median | 12.4% | 12.1% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 11.1% | 10.6% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 14.4% | 13.5% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 3.3% | 2.9% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 5.6% | 4.5% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 5.5% | 4.5% |
Demographics Similar to Chinese and Bahamians by Male Disability
In terms of male disability, the demographic groups most similar to Chinese are British (12.1%, a difference of 0.010%), Slovene (12.0%, a difference of 0.20%), Guamanian/Chamorro (12.0%, a difference of 0.20%), Swiss (12.1%, a difference of 0.25%), and European (12.1%, a difference of 0.25%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Bahamians are Northern European (11.9%, a difference of 0.010%), Czech (11.9%, a difference of 0.040%), Samoan (11.9%, a difference of 0.040%), Italian (11.9%, a difference of 0.080%), and Yugoslavian (11.9%, a difference of 0.14%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Male Disability |
| Yugoslavians | 1.2 /100 | #238 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Italians | 1.2 /100 | #239 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Czechs | 1.1 /100 | #240 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Bahamians | 1.1 /100 | #241 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Northern Europeans | 1.1 /100 | #242 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Samoans | 1.1 /100 | #243 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Immigrants | Laos | 1.0 /100 | #244 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Immigrants | Liberia | 1.0 /100 | #245 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Danes | 0.9 /100 | #246 | Tragic 11.9% |
| Hungarians | 0.8 /100 | #247 | Tragic 12.0% |
| Poles | 0.7 /100 | #248 | Tragic 12.0% |
| Immigrants | Yemen | 0.5 /100 | #249 | Tragic 12.0% |
| Bangladeshis | 0.5 /100 | #250 | Tragic 12.0% |
| German Russians | 0.5 /100 | #251 | Tragic 12.0% |
| Slovenes | 0.5 /100 | #252 | Tragic 12.0% |
| Guamanians/Chamorros | 0.5 /100 | #253 | Tragic 12.0% |
| British | 0.4 /100 | #254 | Tragic 12.1% |
| Chinese | 0.4 /100 | #255 | Tragic 12.1% |
| Swiss | 0.3 /100 | #256 | Tragic 12.1% |
| Europeans | 0.3 /100 | #257 | Tragic 12.1% |
| Basques | 0.3 /100 | #258 | Tragic 12.1% |