Nigerian vs Yugoslavian Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
Nigerian
Yugoslavian
Single Female Poverty
Single Female Poverty Comparison
Nigerians
Yugoslavians
21.4%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
20.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
201st/ 347
METRIC RANK
21.2%
SINGLE FEMALE POVERTY
35.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
188th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Nigerian vs Yugoslavian Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 330,209,143 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Nigerians and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.021 and weighted average of 21.4%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 282,795,313 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Yugoslavians and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.236 and weighted average of 21.2%, a difference of 1.1%.
Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Nigerian | Yugoslavian |
Minimum | 3.3% | 2.0% |
Maximum | 50.0% | 50.2% |
Range | 46.7% | 48.2% |
Mean | 20.7% | 22.1% |
Median | 20.5% | 20.5% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 16.2% | 17.0% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 24.8% | 23.9% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 8.6% | 7.0% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 8.8% | 10.4% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 8.7% | 10.3% |
Demographics Similar to Nigerians and Yugoslavians by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Nigerians are Immigrants from Kenya (21.4%, a difference of 0.020%), Irish (21.4%, a difference of 0.040%), Immigrants (21.4%, a difference of 0.10%), Immigrants from Haiti (21.5%, a difference of 0.20%), and Swiss (21.4%, a difference of 0.29%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Yugoslavians are Immigrants from Cuba (21.2%, a difference of 0.010%), Trinidadian and Tobagonian (21.2%, a difference of 0.010%), Immigrants from Nigeria (21.2%, a difference of 0.090%), Hawaiian (21.2%, a difference of 0.15%), and Immigrants from Cambodia (21.2%, a difference of 0.19%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
Hungarians | 39.6 /100 | #184 | Fair 21.1% |
Immigrants | Cambodia | 38.2 /100 | #185 | Fair 21.2% |
Hawaiians | 37.7 /100 | #186 | Fair 21.2% |
Immigrants | Nigeria | 36.8 /100 | #187 | Fair 21.2% |
Yugoslavians | 35.4 /100 | #188 | Fair 21.2% |
Immigrants | Cuba | 35.3 /100 | #189 | Fair 21.2% |
Trinidadians and Tobagonians | 35.2 /100 | #190 | Fair 21.2% |
Immigrants | Germany | 31.1 /100 | #191 | Fair 21.3% |
Immigrants | Jamaica | 30.5 /100 | #192 | Fair 21.3% |
Basques | 28.1 /100 | #193 | Fair 21.3% |
Czechoslovakians | 27.7 /100 | #194 | Fair 21.3% |
Nicaraguans | 27.6 /100 | #195 | Fair 21.3% |
Immigrants | Saudi Arabia | 27.1 /100 | #196 | Fair 21.3% |
Japanese | 26.4 /100 | #197 | Fair 21.3% |
Swiss | 24.2 /100 | #198 | Fair 21.4% |
Immigrants | Immigrants | 22.0 /100 | #199 | Fair 21.4% |
Irish | 21.4 /100 | #200 | Fair 21.4% |
Nigerians | 20.9 /100 | #201 | Fair 21.4% |
Immigrants | Kenya | 20.7 /100 | #202 | Fair 21.4% |
Immigrants | Haiti | 18.8 /100 | #203 | Poor 21.5% |
Immigrants | Africa | 16.7 /100 | #204 | Poor 21.5% |