Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)
Report an error
Google searches for 'what is the FDIC' correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Total viewership of the Aviva Premiership Rugby final | r=0.97 | 11yrs | No |
| Liquefied petroleum gas used in Puerto Rico | r=0.96 | 18yrs | No |
| Wind power generated in Czechia | r=0.95 | 18yrs | No |
| Inflation in the US | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
| Average milk produced per cow in the US | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
| Annual US household spending on fresh fruits | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Luciano | r=0.91 | 19yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Muhammad | r=0.9 | 19yrs | No |
| Air quality in Sacramento | r=0.88 | 20yrs | No |
| Eli Lilly and Company's stock price (LLY) | r=0.83 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'what is the FDIC' 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.)
