Additional Info: Via Microsoft Excel Stockhistory function
Report an error
Warner Bros. Discovery's stock price (WBD) correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
US average milk-fat content of yogurt, nonfrozen | r=0.92 | 16yrs | No |
Petroluem consumption in Angola | r=0.9 | 16yrs | Yes! |
The number of consultants in District of Columbia | r=0.9 | 17yrs | No |
Total views on SmarterEveryDay YouTube videos | r=0.89 | 17yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'google' | r=0.87 | 18yrs | Yes! |
Air quality in Vineland, New Jersey | r=0.87 | 18yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the 'doge' meme | r=0.85 | 18yrs | Yes! |
Master's degrees awarded in Communications technologies | r=0.74 | 10yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' | r=0.63 | 18yrs | No |
Warner Bros. Discovery's stock price (WBD) 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.)