Report an error
US Rice Consumption correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of human resources specialists in Utah | r=0.92 | 11yrs | No |
| Master's degrees awarded in Health professions and related programs | r=0.87 | 10yrs | No |
| Bachelor's degrees awarded in biomedical sciences | r=0.86 | 10yrs | No |
| The average number of likes on Technology Connections YouTube videos | r=0.86 | 8yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'who is alexa' | r=0.83 | 14yrs | Yes! |
| Average number of comments on Steve Mould's YouTube videos | r=0.82 | 14yrs | No |
| Cost to send a letter via the USPS | r=0.8 | 14yrs | Yes! |
| Walmart's stock price (WMT) | r=0.8 | 14yrs | No |
| The number of private detectives in Ohio | r=0.76 | 14yrs | No |
US Rice Consumption 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.)