Report an error
Votes for Democratic Senators in Pennsylvania correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of rock splitters, quarry in Pennsylvania | r=0.97 | 6yrs | No |
| The number of private detectives in Pennsylvania | r=0.87 | 6yrs | No |
| Customer satisfaction with UPS | r=0.86 | 9yrs | No |
| Brad Pitt's net worth | r=0.86 | 6yrs | No |
| Air quality in Altoona, Pennsylvania | r=0.8 | 13yrs | No |
| Public school high school enrollments in the United States | r=0.67 | 14yrs | No |
| Italian-type cheese consumption | r=0.65 | 8yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Damian | r=0.64 | 15yrs | No |
Votes for Democratic Senators in Pennsylvania 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.)
