Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)
Report an error
Google searches for 'oprah winfrey' correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of bill collectors in Colorado | r=0.98 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Ty | r=0.96 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Andrew | r=0.96 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Darrin | r=0.96 | 19yrs | No |
| Pirate attacks globally | r=0.95 | 14yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Michaela | r=0.95 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Hayley | r=0.94 | 19yrs | No |
| National Lacrosse Champions' Final Point | r=0.93 | 19yrs | Yes! |
| GMO use in corn | r=0.93 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Kaylyn | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Grace | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
| Number of Portugal matches played by Cristiano Ronaldo | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
| Electricity generation in United Kingdom | r=0.91 | 18yrs | No |
| Robberies in Ohio | r=0.89 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Kylie | r=0.86 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Lauryn | r=0.84 | 19yrs | No |
| The number of movies Sean Bean appeared in | r=0.48 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'oprah winfrey' 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.)