Report an error
Points allowed by the Green Bay Packers correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
US average milk-fat content of cream products | r=0.79 | 7yrs | No |
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Wisconsin | r=0.77 | 12yrs | No |
Electricity generation in Azerbaijan | r=0.65 | 30yrs | No |
Milk-fat consumption | r=0.55 | 32yrs | No |
Butter consumption | r=0.53 | 32yrs | No |
Natural cheese consumption | r=0.53 | 27yrs | No |
Cheddar cheese consumption | r=0.45 | 27yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Devontae | r=-0.52 | 37yrs | No |
Points allowed by the Green Bay Packers 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.)