Additional Info: Relative search volume is a unique Google thing; the shape of the chart is accurate but the actual numbers are meaningless.
Report an error
Popularity of the 'this is fine' meme correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Electricity generation in Guinea-Bissau | r=0.98 | 16yrs | Yes! |
Number of public school students in 11th grade | r=0.98 | 17yrs | Yes! |
The number of Breweries in the United States | r=0.95 | 17yrs | Yes! |
US per-person consumption of bottled water | r=0.95 | 17yrs | No |
Gender pay gap in the U.S. | r=0.94 | 16yrs | No |
The number of consultants in California | r=0.94 | 17yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Walter | r=0.93 | 17yrs | No |
Automotive recalls issued by Mercedes-Benz USA | r=0.93 | 17yrs | No |
American cheese consumption | r=0.93 | 16yrs | Yes! |
The number of heating, air conditioning, and refrigeration mechanics and installers in Florida | r=0.92 | 17yrs | No |
Google searches for 'spurious correlations' | r=0.89 | 18yrs | No |
Google searches for 'white house hotline' | r=0.88 | 18yrs | No |
Worldwide Harry Potter Movies Revenue | r=0.85 | 6yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to treat internal bleeding' | r=0.73 | 18yrs | No |
The number of movies Will Smith appeared in | r=0.58 | 17yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'this is fine' meme 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.)