Report an error
Ticket sales for Oakland Athletics games correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of title examiners, abstractors, and searchers in California | r=0.9 | 17yrs | No |
The number of sheet metal workers in California | r=0.84 | 17yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Vincent | r=0.83 | 45yrs | No |
Bachelor's degrees awarded in Library science | r=0.82 | 8yrs | Yes! |
Global count of operating nuclear power plants | r=0.62 | 45yrs | No |
The number of movies Denzel Washington appeared in | r=0.46 | 43yrs | No |
Ticket sales for Oakland Athletics games 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.)