Report an error
Popularity of the first name Anastasia correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Solar power generated in Burundi | r=0.97 | 12yrs | No |
| The number of office clerks in Montana | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'smol' | r=0.94 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the 'this is fine' meme | r=0.93 | 17yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'Rachel and Ross' | r=0.92 | 15yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'cat memes' | r=0.92 | 19yrs | No |
| American cheese consumption | r=0.9 | 32yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'spurious correlations' | r=0.9 | 19yrs | No |
| Average milk produced per cow in the US | r=0.9 | 43yrs | No |
| The number of movies Nicolas Cage appeared in | r=0.64 | 43yrs | No |
| Average temperature in Chicago | r=0.53 | 47yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Anastasia 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.)