Additional Info: Current total views of videos released that year.
Report an error
Total views on Steve Mould's YouTube videos correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Eli Lilly and Company's stock price (LLY) | r=0.95 | 15yrs | No |
Motorola Solutions' stock price (MSI) | r=0.92 | 15yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to move to europe' | r=0.92 | 15yrs | No |
The number of mobile heavy equipment mechanics in Alabama | r=0.91 | 14yrs | No |
United Rentals' stock price (URI) | r=0.9 | 15yrs | No |
Average temperature in Detroit | r=0.33 | 15yrs | No |
Total views on Steve Mould's YouTube videos 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.)