Report an error
Annual US household spending on fresh milk and cream correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of computer user support specialists in Vermont | r=0.96 | 11yrs | No |
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Idaho | r=0.94 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Wisconsin | r=0.93 | 6yrs | No |
The number of market research analysts in Puerto Rico | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in South Dakota | r=0.9 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Nebraska | r=0.86 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Average length of SciShow Space YouTube videos | r=0.8 | 9yrs | No |
Annual US household spending on fresh milk and cream 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.)