Turkish vs Zimbabwean Male Poverty
COMPARE
Turkish
Zimbabwean
Male Poverty
Male Poverty Comparison
Turks
Zimbabweans
10.0%
MALE POVERTY
98.9/ 100
METRIC RATING
46th/ 347
METRIC RANK
10.2%
MALE POVERTY
97.5/ 100
METRIC RATING
65th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Turkish vs Zimbabwean Male Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 271,656,534 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Turks and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.037 and weighted average of 10.0%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 69,180,294 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans and poverty level among males in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.027 and weighted average of 10.2%, a difference of 2.2%.
Male Poverty Correlation Summary
Measurement | Turkish | Zimbabwean |
Minimum | 2.9% | 1.2% |
Maximum | 20.9% | 18.8% |
Range | 18.0% | 17.7% |
Mean | 8.3% | 8.1% |
Median | 7.8% | 8.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 6.2% | 5.1% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 8.9% | 11.1% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.7% | 5.9% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 3.8% | 4.1% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 3.7% | 4.1% |
Demographics Similar to Turks and Zimbabweans by Male Poverty
In terms of male poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Turks are Immigrants from Serbia (10.0%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Singapore (10.0%, a difference of 0.13%), Immigrants from Japan (10.0%, a difference of 0.13%), Slovene (10.0%, a difference of 0.23%), and Immigrants from Philippines (10.0%, a difference of 0.28%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Zimbabweans are Swiss (10.2%, a difference of 0.070%), Slovak (10.2%, a difference of 0.30%), Immigrants from Italy (10.2%, a difference of 0.35%), Austrian (10.1%, a difference of 0.44%), and Ukrainian (10.1%, a difference of 0.45%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Male Poverty |
Immigrants | Serbia | 98.9 /100 | #45 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Turks | 98.9 /100 | #46 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Immigrants | Singapore | 98.8 /100 | #47 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Immigrants | Japan | 98.8 /100 | #48 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Slovenes | 98.8 /100 | #49 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Immigrants | Philippines | 98.7 /100 | #50 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Immigrants | Croatia | 98.7 /100 | #51 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Asians | 98.7 /100 | #52 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Immigrants | Czechoslovakia | 98.6 /100 | #53 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Immigrants | Austria | 98.5 /100 | #54 | Exceptional 10.0% |
Germans | 98.3 /100 | #55 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Immigrants | Bulgaria | 98.2 /100 | #56 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Estonians | 98.1 /100 | #57 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Scandinavians | 98.0 /100 | #58 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Immigrants | Europe | 97.9 /100 | #59 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Ukrainians | 97.9 /100 | #60 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Austrians | 97.8 /100 | #61 | Exceptional 10.1% |
Immigrants | Italy | 97.8 /100 | #62 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Slovaks | 97.7 /100 | #63 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Swiss | 97.5 /100 | #64 | Exceptional 10.2% |
Zimbabweans | 97.5 /100 | #65 | Exceptional 10.2% |