Report an error
Popularity of the first name Hayley correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The marriage rate in Tennessee | r=0.98 | 23yrs | No |
| The number of file clerks in Georgia | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
| The number of CEOs in Ohio | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
| Pirate attacks globally | r=0.95 | 14yrs | No |
| Petroluem consumption in Germany | r=0.95 | 32yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'oprah winfrey' | r=0.94 | 19yrs | No |
| Carjackings in the US | r=0.92 | 27yrs | No |
| Gasoline pumped in Spain | r=0.91 | 43yrs | No |
| Ticket sales for Baltimore Orioles games | r=0.89 | 45yrs | No |
| Total minutes of Doctor Who aired | r=-0.71 | 48yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Hayley 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.)