Report an error
Annual US household spending on pork correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of social workers in New York | r=0.98 | 13yrs | No |
Lululemon's stock price (LULU) | r=0.97 | 15yrs | Yes! |
Synopsys' stock price (SNPS) | r=0.93 | 21yrs | Yes! |
Solar power generated in Afghanistan | r=0.93 | 12yrs | No |
Eli Lilly and Company's stock price (LLY) | r=0.92 | 21yrs | No |
Cost to send a letter via the USPS | r=0.92 | 17yrs | No |
Annual US household spending on pork 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.)