Report an error
Season wins for the Detroit Lions correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Amount spent on Pet Gifts on Valentine's Day in the US | r=0.87 | 9yrs | No |
Viewership of "The Big Bang Theory" | r=0.69 | 12yrs | No |
Google searches for 'Practical Engineering' | r=0.67 | 17yrs | Yes! |
Ford Motor Company's stock price (F) | r=0.64 | 22yrs | No |
Google searches for 'im not even mad' | r=0.62 | 20yrs | Yes! |
Golden Boot Player's English Premier League Goal Tally | r=0.52 | 31yrs | No |
Season wins for the Detroit Lions 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.)