Report an error
Robberies in North Carolina correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Popularity of the first name Brooke | r=0.95 | 38yrs | No |
Milk consumption | r=0.94 | 32yrs | Yes! |
The number of computer programmers in North Carolina | r=0.93 | 20yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Jose | r=0.91 | 38yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Carina | r=0.9 | 38yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Tania | r=0.9 | 38yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Jacob | r=0.88 | 38yrs | No |
Robberies in North Carolina 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.)