Report an error
Popularity of the first name Colt correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Average number of comments on Mark Rober YouTube videos | r=0.97 | 12yrs | No |
Electricity generation in Angola | r=0.97 | 42yrs | No |
Total comments on MrBeast's YouTube videos | r=0.96 | 11yrs | Yes! |
The average number of likes on Simone Giertz's YouTube videos | r=0.94 | 9yrs | Yes! |
The price of gold | r=0.93 | 40yrs | No |
Google searches for 'i am dizzy' | r=0.92 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'we live in a society' meme | r=0.84 | 17yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Colt 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.)