Report an error
Annual US household spending on pets, toys, and hobbies correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Texas | r=0.98 | 6yrs | No |
The number of pharmacists in Minnesota | r=0.96 | 20yrs | No |
Electricity generation in Cayman Islands | r=0.96 | 22yrs | No |
Ticket prices at North American movie theaters | r=0.95 | 22yrs | No |
Solar power generated in Haiti | r=0.95 | 10yrs | No |
The distance between Neptune and Uranus | r=0.95 | 23yrs | No |
Average number of milk cows in the United States | r=0.91 | 23yrs | No |
Annual US household spending on pets, toys, and hobbies 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.)