Report an error
The number of private detectives in Nevada correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Total number of passenger vehicles sold in China | r=0.9 | 7yrs | No |
Divorce rates in the United Kingdom | r=0.89 | 10yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'expanding brain' meme | r=0.82 | 17yrs | No |
Google searches for 'unicorns' | r=0.76 | 19yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Harry | r=0.71 | 20yrs | No |
Car crashes in the US | r=0.71 | 12yrs | No |
Professor salaries in the US | r=0.71 | 13yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Martina | r=0.7 | 20yrs | No |
The number of movies Keanu Reeves appeared in | r=0.66 | 20yrs | No |
Associate Professor salaries in the US | r=0.66 | 13yrs | No |
Home Run Count for the Texas Rangers Team | r=0.65 | 20yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Galen | r=0.61 | 20yrs | No |
The number of private detectives in Nevada 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.)