Report an error
Popularity of the first name Victoria correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
How good LockPickingLawyer YouTube video titles are | r=0.97 | 8yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Visual and performing arts | r=0.95 | 10yrs | No |
The marriage rate in Ohio | r=0.95 | 23yrs | No |
Petroluem consumption in Germany | r=0.95 | 32yrs | No |
How insightful LockPickingLawyer YouTube video titles are | r=0.94 | 8yrs | No |
US household spending on shoes | r=0.91 | 23yrs | No |
Ticket sales for Baltimore Orioles games | r=0.9 | 45yrs | No |
Carjackings in the US | r=0.89 | 27yrs | No |
NASA's budget appropriation | r=0.75 | 48yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Victoria 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.)