Report an error
Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Solar power generated in Central African Republic | r=0.92 | 8yrs | No |
Associates degrees awarded in Dental assisting | r=0.91 | 11yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'where to buy toilet paper' | r=-0.89 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' | r=-0.89 | 20yrs | Yes! |
Google searches for 'n95 mask' | r=-0.9 | 19yrs | No |
Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles 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.)