Report an error
UFO sightings in Utah correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Patents granted in the US | r=0.93 | 46yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Zoey | r=0.9 | 47yrs | No |
Biomass power generated in Portugal | r=0.88 | 42yrs | Yes! |
Biomass power generated in Belgium | r=0.87 | 42yrs | No |
Fossil fuel use in Dominican Republic | r=0.87 | 42yrs | No |
Electricity generation in Cabo Verde | r=0.86 | 42yrs | No |
USA Population | r=0.84 | 47yrs | No |
Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion | r=0.82 | 43yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'best breed of dog' | r=0.79 | 18yrs | No |
Annual Revenue of Walt Disney Company | r=0.76 | 31yrs | No |
The number of movies Meryl Streep appeared in | r=0.67 | 47yrs | No |
Average temperature in Berlin | r=0.55 | 47yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Utah 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.)