Report an error
Popularity of the first name Miles correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Number of internet users | r=0.99 | 24yrs | No |
| Total renewable energy production globally | r=0.99 | 42yrs | No |
| Electricity generation in Tanzania | r=0.99 | 42yrs | No |
| Fossil fuel use in Bangladesh | r=0.98 | 42yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'i have a headache' | r=0.98 | 19yrs | No |
| Patents granted in the US | r=0.98 | 46yrs | No |
| Patents granted in the US | r=0.97 | 46yrs | No |
| Butter consumption | r=0.97 | 32yrs | No |
| Solar power generated in Spain | r=0.97 | 32yrs | Yes! |
| Inflation in the US | r=0.97 | 31yrs | No |
| Cummins' stock price (CMI) | r=0.95 | 21yrs | Yes! |
| Unilever's stock price (UL) | r=0.95 | 21yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Miles 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.)