Report an error
Popularity of the first name Zoe correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Number of Las Vegas Hotel Room Check-Ins | r=0.97 | 39yrs | No |
Electricity generation in Australia | r=0.96 | 42yrs | No |
UFO sightings in California | r=0.95 | 47yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Washington | r=0.95 | 47yrs | Yes! |
Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion | r=0.93 | 44yrs | No |
UFO sightings in Arkansas | r=0.91 | 47yrs | No |
Liquefied petroleum gas used in Argentina | r=0.91 | 42yrs | No |
Google searches for 'Taylor Swift' | r=0.73 | 17yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Zoe 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.)