Report an error
Burglaries in Michigan correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
US production of fluid beverage milk | r=0.99 | 22yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Liberal arts | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Kimberly | r=0.98 | 38yrs | No |
Milk consumption | r=0.97 | 32yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Christopher | r=0.96 | 38yrs | No |
Pirate attacks globally | r=0.94 | 14yrs | No |
The number of human resources assistants in Michigan | r=0.9 | 20yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Janelle | r=0.9 | 38yrs | No |
Burglaries in Michigan 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.)