Report an error
Popularity of the first name Alix correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Carjackings in the US | r=0.97 | 27yrs | Yes! |
The marriage rate in Nevada | r=0.96 | 23yrs | No |
Frozen yogurt consumption | r=0.96 | 32yrs | No |
The number of computer programmers in Colorado | r=0.95 | 20yrs | No |
Violent crime rates | r=0.95 | 38yrs | No |
Robberies in Maryland | r=0.93 | 38yrs | No |
Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon | r=0.93 | 36yrs | No |
US household spending on books | r=0.92 | 23yrs | No |
US birth rates of triplets or more | r=0.92 | 20yrs | No |
Jet fuel used in Germany, West | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
Gasoline pumped in Germany | r=0.91 | 32yrs | No |
The marriage rate in Louisiana | r=0.89 | 23yrs | No |
The divorce rate in Wyoming | r=0.89 | 23yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Alix 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.)