Report an error
Votes for Democratic Senators in Connecticut correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Ford Motor Company's stock price (F) | r=0.97 | 6yrs | No |
Google searches for 'what color should I paint my house' | r=0.96 | 6yrs | No |
Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' | r=0.9 | 6yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to annex texas' | r=0.86 | 6yrs | Yes! |
Total Runs Scored by Chicago Cubs Team in National League (Central and East Division) | r=0.69 | 15yrs | No |
Votes for Democratic Senators in Connecticut 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.)