Report an error
Popularity of the first name Lizbeth correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of compensation and benefits managers in Pennsylvania | r=0.99 | 19yrs | No |
| The number of file clerks in Georgia | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
| The number of typists in Texas | r=0.98 | 20yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'learn spanish' | r=0.97 | 19yrs | No |
| The number of computer programmers in Colorado | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
| Gasoline pumped in Kosovo | r=0.97 | 14yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'black holes' | r=0.95 | 19yrs | No |
| US music album sales | r=0.88 | 16yrs | No |
| Air pollution in Portsmouth, Ohio | r=0.88 | 35yrs | No |
| Gasoline pumped in Ireland | r=0.75 | 43yrs | No |
| Air pollution in Chico, California | r=0.72 | 43yrs | Yes! |
| Google searches for 'i cant even' | r=-0.94 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Lizbeth 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.)