Report an error
The number of sewing machine operators in California correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Popularity of the first name Jason | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Elizabeth | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Richard | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Anna | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Frank | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Paul | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Mathew | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Samuel | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Adam | r=0.99 | 20yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Roger | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
| Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
| Petroluem consumption in France | r=0.96 | 20yrs | No |
The number of sewing machine operators in California 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.)