Report an error
US household spending on fresh fruits correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Google searches for 'i am tired' | r=0.97 | 19yrs | No |
US production of dry milk products (net) | r=0.94 | 22yrs | No |
Google searches for 'i have a headache' | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
Google searches for 'tummy ache' | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
Number of firearms manufactured in the US | r=0.93 | 22yrs | No |
Amount spent on Pet Gifts on Valentine's Day in the US | r=0.92 | 9yrs | No |
Air quality in Pittsburgh | r=0.92 | 23yrs | No |
The distance between Saturn and Earth | r=0.92 | 23yrs | No |
The number of dietitians and nutritionists in Washington | r=0.87 | 20yrs | No |
The number of nursing assistants in Arizona | r=0.86 | 11yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to hide a body' | r=0.85 | 19yrs | No |
US household spending on fresh fruits 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.)