Additional Info: All headline and summary text from Bloomberg articles by Matt Levine included
Report an error
Number of articles Matt Levine published on Bloomberg on Fridays correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Popularity of the first name Catherine | r=0.97 | 9yrs | No |
Telefónica's stock price (TEF) | r=0.97 | 10yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Isabella | r=0.97 | 9yrs | No |
Number of times 1 was a winning Mega Millions number | r=0.97 | 7yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to delete browsing history' | r=0.97 | 10yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Britton | r=0.96 | 9yrs | No |
Number of public school students in 2nd grade | r=0.96 | 9yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'overly attached girlfriend' meme | r=0.84 | 10yrs | No |
Number of articles Matt Levine published on Bloomberg on Fridays 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.)