Report an error
Votes for Libertarian Senators in Utah correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Popularity of the first name Demi | r=0.98 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Formula One World Drivers' Champion's Point Margin | r=0.98 | 7yrs | No |
The number of movies Bill Murray appeared in | r=0.95 | 6yrs | No |
Automotive recalls issued by Winnebago Industries | r=0.93 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Automotive recalls issued by Porsche | r=0.92 | 7yrs | No |
Automotive recalls issued by Honda | r=0.91 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Hot days in Berlin | r=0.89 | 7yrs | No |
The number of movies Gary Oldman appeared in | r=0.86 | 6yrs | No |
Points Scored by the losing team in the Super Bowl | r=0.81 | 7yrs | No |
NYSE Composite Index Annual Percentage Change | r=-0.93 | 7yrs | No |
Votes for Libertarian Senators in Utah 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.)