Additional Info: Via Microsoft Excel Stockhistory function
Report an error
Walmart's stock price (WMT) correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Popularity of the first name Sunny | r=0.96 | 21yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'my cat scratched me' | r=0.96 | 16yrs | No |
Wind power generated in Norway | r=0.95 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'best colleges' | r=0.94 | 20yrs | No |
Air quality in Pittsburgh | r=0.92 | 22yrs | Yes! |
The number of real estate agents in Oregon | r=0.91 | 17yrs | No |
US Rice Consumption | r=0.8 | 14yrs | No |
The number of nursing instructors and teachers in Arizona | r=0.78 | 20yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Melanie | r=-0.91 | 21yrs | No |
Walmart's stock price (WMT) 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.)