Report an error
Votes for Democratic Senators in Oregon correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Google searches for 'i cant fall asleep' | r=0.97 | 6yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to annex texas' | r=0.96 | 6yrs | Yes! |
The number of movies Gemma Arterton appeared in | r=0.87 | 6yrs | No |
Petroluem consumption in Tonga | r=0.76 | 14yrs | No |
Votes for Democratic Senators in Oregon 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.)