Report an error
Popularity of the first name Gabriella correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Number of Las Vegas Hotel Room Check-Ins | r=0.97 | 39yrs | No |
| Pirate attacks globally | r=0.94 | 14yrs | No |
| Total Number of Successful Mount Everest Climbs | r=0.93 | 37yrs | No |
| GMO use in corn | r=0.93 | 23yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'xkcd' | r=0.92 | 16yrs | No |
| United States' Fruit Juice Export Volume | r=0.9 | 13yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'how to do magic' | r=0.9 | 19yrs | No |
| The distance between Uranus and Saturn | r=0.88 | 48yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'call of duty' | r=0.85 | 19yrs | No |
| Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion | r=0.84 | 44yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Gabriella 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.)