Report an error
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in New Mexico correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Global shipwrecks | r=0.95 | 10yrs | Yes! |
Number of websites on the internet | r=0.95 | 7yrs | No |
US household spending on telephone services | r=0.93 | 6yrs | No |
Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake | r=0.92 | 11yrs | No |
Liquefied petroleum gas used in Haiti | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
Jet fuel used in Papua New Guinea | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
Jet fuel used in Colombia | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Pearl | r=0.9 | 12yrs | Yes! |
Jet fuel used in Georgia | r=0.89 | 8yrs | No |
The price of gold | r=0.88 | 10yrs | No |
Automotive recalls issued by Chrysler | r=0.7 | 12yrs | No |
UFO sightings in New Mexico | r=0.6 | 12yrs | No |
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in New Mexico 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.)