Report an error
Popularity of the first name Hanna correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Popularity of the 'what does the fox say' meme | r=0.98 | 10yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'Gangnam Style' | r=0.98 | 11yrs | No |
Bachelor's degrees awarded in gender studies | r=0.98 | 10yrs | No |
The number of prepress technicians and workers in North Carolina | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
Gasoline pumped in Portugal | r=0.95 | 43yrs | No |
US average milk-fat content of frozen dairy products | r=0.95 | 22yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Education | r=0.94 | 10yrs | No |
Kerosene used in South Korea | r=0.94 | 43yrs | No |
Average number of comments on Numberphile YouTube videos | r=0.93 | 12yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'snoop dog' | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
Nuclear power generation in United Kingdom | r=0.9 | 42yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Hanna 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.)