Immigrants from China vs Luxembourger Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
Immigrants from China
Luxembourger
Single Female Poverty
Single Female Poverty Comparison
Immigrants from China
Luxembourgers
18.1%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
100.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
19th/ 347
METRIC RANK
20.4%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
84.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
148th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from China vs Luxembourger Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 446,922,860 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.000 and weighted average of 18.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 143,364,483 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Luxembourgers and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.206 and weighted average of 20.4%, a difference of 12.7%.
Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Immigrants from China | Luxembourger |
Minimum | 7.4% | 10.2% |
Maximum | 33.3% | 52.1% |
Range | 25.9% | 41.9% |
Mean | 16.3% | 21.8% |
Median | 15.7% | 20.7% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 13.6% | 17.3% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 18.6% | 25.0% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 4.9% | 7.7% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 4.6% | 8.6% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 4.5% | 8.5% |
Similar Demographics by Single Female Poverty
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from China by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from China are Immigrants from Eastern Asia (18.1%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Korea (18.1%, a difference of 0.32%), Immigrants from Greece (18.3%, a difference of 0.68%), Maltese (18.3%, a difference of 0.74%), and Burmese (18.3%, a difference of 0.75%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
Immigrants | South Central Asia | 100.0 /100 | #12 | Exceptional 17.8% |
Immigrants | Bolivia | 100.0 /100 | #13 | Exceptional 17.8% |
Bolivians | 100.0 /100 | #14 | Exceptional 17.9% |
Indians (Asian) | 100.0 /100 | #15 | Exceptional 17.9% |
Iranians | 100.0 /100 | #16 | Exceptional 18.0% |
Immigrants | Korea | 100.0 /100 | #17 | Exceptional 18.1% |
Immigrants | Eastern Asia | 100.0 /100 | #18 | Exceptional 18.1% |
Immigrants | China | 100.0 /100 | #19 | Exceptional 18.1% |
Immigrants | Greece | 100.0 /100 | #20 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Maltese | 100.0 /100 | #21 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Burmese | 100.0 /100 | #22 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Asians | 100.0 /100 | #23 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Armenians | 100.0 /100 | #24 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Immigrants | Singapore | 100.0 /100 | #25 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Immigrants | Israel | 100.0 /100 | #26 | Exceptional 18.3% |
Demographics Similar to Luxembourgers by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Luxembourgers are South African (20.4%, a difference of 0.050%), Venezuelan (20.4%, a difference of 0.080%), Austrian (20.4%, a difference of 0.11%), Portuguese (20.5%, a difference of 0.39%), and Immigrants from Uzbekistan (20.3%, a difference of 0.47%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
Immigrants | North America | 89.5 /100 | #141 | Excellent 20.3% |
Immigrants | Uganda | 89.1 /100 | #142 | Excellent 20.3% |
Australians | 88.4 /100 | #143 | Excellent 20.3% |
Immigrants | Uzbekistan | 88.3 /100 | #144 | Excellent 20.3% |
Austrians | 85.8 /100 | #145 | Excellent 20.4% |
Venezuelans | 85.5 /100 | #146 | Excellent 20.4% |
South Africans | 85.3 /100 | #147 | Excellent 20.4% |
Luxembourgers | 84.9 /100 | #148 | Excellent 20.4% |
Portuguese | 81.5 /100 | #149 | Excellent 20.5% |
Immigrants | Denmark | 80.5 /100 | #150 | Excellent 20.5% |
Puget Sound Salish | 79.6 /100 | #151 | Good 20.6% |
Immigrants | Uruguay | 77.7 /100 | #152 | Good 20.6% |
Swedes | 77.1 /100 | #153 | Good 20.6% |
Immigrants | Western Europe | 76.7 /100 | #154 | Good 20.6% |
Samoans | 76.0 /100 | #155 | Good 20.6% |