Report an error
US Sales of Artificial Christmas Trees correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of print binding and finishing workers in Connecticut | r=0.98 | 9yrs | No |
| The number of labor relations specialists in Hawaii | r=0.97 | 7yrs | No |
| The number of event planners in Nevada | r=0.96 | 7yrs | No |
| The number of MRI technicians in Wisconsin | r=0.95 | 7yrs | No |
| Master's degrees awarded in Engineering technologies | r=0.94 | 7yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'avocado toast' | r=0.94 | 11yrs | No |
| The number of art directors in Utah | r=0.92 | 15yrs | No |
| Air pollution in Clarksville, Tennessee | r=0.88 | 9yrs | Yes! |
| Master's degrees awarded in Physical sciences | r=0.85 | 7yrs | No |
| The number of university economics teachers in Idaho | r=0.81 | 9yrs | Yes! |
US Sales of Artificial Christmas Trees 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.)