Additional Info: Via Microsoft Excel Stockhistory function
Report an error
Oracle's stock price (ORCL) correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Google searches for 'how to go to space' | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'when is new years' | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'cold shower' | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
Annual US household spending on eggs | r=0.97 | 21yrs | No |
Google searches for 'do i need to go to the doctor' | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
Butter consumption | r=0.96 | 20yrs | Yes! |
Mozzarella cheese consumption | r=0.92 | 20yrs | No |
US average dairy skim-solid content of yogurt, nonfrozen | r=0.91 | 20yrs | No |
Oracle's stock price (ORCL) 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.)