Report an error
The number of college computer science teachers in New Mexico correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Wind power generated in Samoa | r=0.96 | 8yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'harambe' meme | r=0.95 | 7yrs | No |
Gasoline pumped in American Samoa | r=0.92 | 19yrs | No |
Jet fuel used in Kyrgyzstan | r=0.87 | 19yrs | Yes! |
xkcd comics published about romance | r=0.83 | 16yrs | Yes! |
Annual US household spending on mortgage interest and charges | r=0.82 | 20yrs | No |
Liquefied petroleum gas used in Netherlands Antilles | r=0.78 | 19yrs | No |
China's Rare Earth Element Export Volume | r=0.76 | 11yrs | No |
The number of college computer science teachers in New Mexico 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.)