Report an error
Popularity of the first name Braxton correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Google searches for 'how to make baby' | r=0.97 | 19yrs | No |
| Viewership of "The Big Bang Theory" | r=0.96 | 12yrs | No |
| Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Maryland | r=0.95 | 12yrs | No |
| Hotdogs consumed by Nathan's Hot Dog Eating Competition Champion | r=0.94 | 44yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'google' | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'Kahn Academy' | r=0.91 | 16yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Braxton 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.)