Sioux vs Immigrants from Nicaragua No Vehicles in Household
COMPARE
Sioux
Immigrants from Nicaragua
No Vehicles in Household
No Vehicles in Household Comparison
Sioux
Immigrants from Nicaragua
10.1%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
72.4/ 100
METRIC RATING
154th/ 347
METRIC RANK
9.9%
NO VEHICLES IN HOUSEHOLD
79.8/ 100
METRIC RATING
147th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Sioux vs Immigrants from Nicaragua No Vehicles in Household Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 233,693,165 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Sioux and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.657 and weighted average of 10.1%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 236,149,436 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Nicaragua and percentage of households with no vehicle available in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.352 and weighted average of 9.9%, a difference of 1.5%.
No Vehicles in Household Correlation Summary
Measurement | Sioux | Immigrants from Nicaragua |
Minimum | 0.66% | 1.0% |
Maximum | 44.7% | 25.6% |
Range | 44.0% | 24.6% |
Mean | 12.4% | 8.9% |
Median | 7.8% | 8.3% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 5.8% | 5.4% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 18.4% | 10.4% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 12.5% | 5.0% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 9.5% | 5.4% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 9.4% | 5.4% |
Demographics Similar to Sioux and Immigrants from Nicaragua by No Vehicles in Household
In terms of no vehicles in household, the demographic groups most similar to Sioux are Salvadoran (10.1%, a difference of 0.010%), Tlingit-Haida (10.1%, a difference of 0.020%), Immigrants from Congo (10.1%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Eastern Africa (10.0%, a difference of 0.25%), and Colombian (10.0%, a difference of 0.26%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Nicaragua are Hungarian (9.9%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Bosnia and Herzegovina (9.9%, a difference of 0.15%), Bahamian (9.9%, a difference of 0.28%), Chilean (9.9%, a difference of 0.31%), and Immigrants from Bahamas (9.9%, a difference of 0.31%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | No Vehicles in Household |
Immigrants | Lithuania | 84.0 /100 | #140 | Excellent 9.8% |
Sudanese | 83.1 /100 | #141 | Excellent 9.8% |
Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 82.6 /100 | #142 | Excellent 9.9% |
Chileans | 81.2 /100 | #143 | Excellent 9.9% |
Immigrants | Bahamas | 81.2 /100 | #144 | Excellent 9.9% |
Bahamians | 81.0 /100 | #145 | Excellent 9.9% |
Hungarians | 80.0 /100 | #146 | Excellent 9.9% |
Immigrants | Nicaragua | 79.8 /100 | #147 | Good 9.9% |
Immigrants | Bosnia and Herzegovina | 79.1 /100 | #148 | Good 9.9% |
Immigrants | Uganda | 76.1 /100 | #149 | Good 10.0% |
Colombians | 73.9 /100 | #150 | Good 10.0% |
Immigrants | Eastern Africa | 73.8 /100 | #151 | Good 10.0% |
Immigrants | Congo | 73.0 /100 | #152 | Good 10.1% |
Tlingit-Haida | 72.5 /100 | #153 | Good 10.1% |
Sioux | 72.4 /100 | #154 | Good 10.1% |
Salvadorans | 72.4 /100 | #155 | Good 10.1% |
Immigrants | Micronesia | 70.9 /100 | #156 | Good 10.1% |
Australians | 70.6 /100 | #157 | Good 10.1% |
Spanish American Indians | 70.2 /100 | #158 | Good 10.1% |
Immigrants | Indonesia | 69.3 /100 | #159 | Good 10.1% |
Immigrants | Middle Africa | 65.7 /100 | #160 | Good 10.2% |