Report an error
Amazon's Annual Outbound Shipping Expenditure in Millions correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of Breweries in the United States | r=1 | 11yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Ellis | r=1 | 11yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Greyson | r=0.98 | 11yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'smol' | r=0.97 | 11yrs | No |
| Popularity of the 'loss' meme | r=0.96 | 10yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'cute cats' | r=0.95 | 11yrs | Yes! |
| The number of private detectives in Delaware | r=0.92 | 11yrs | Yes! |
| Boston Celtics' annual draft pick count | r=0.85 | 11yrs | No |
| Air quality in Ogden, Utah | r=0.81 | 11yrs | Yes! |
Amazon's Annual Outbound Shipping Expenditure in Millions also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)