Report an error
Rainfall in San Francisco correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of printing press operators in Rhode Island | r=0.91 | 13yrs | Yes! |
The number of preschool special education teachers in Missouri | r=0.88 | 11yrs | Yes! |
How nerdy OverSimplified YouTube video titles are | r=0.86 | 7yrs | No |
Votes for Libertarian Senators in Alabama | r=0.85 | 6yrs | No |
Air quality in Carbondale, Illinois | r=0.78 | 7yrs | No |
Global annual sales of the Xbox 360 | r=0.75 | 10yrs | No |
Master's degrees awarded in Theology and religious vocations | r=0.71 | 10yrs | Yes! |
The number of pipelayers in Kansas | r=0.68 | 18yrs | No |
Votes for Republican Senators in Idaho | r=0.56 | 15yrs | No |
Petroluem consumption in Guam | r=0.52 | 42yrs | No |
Air quality in Salinas, California | r=0.46 | 43yrs | No |
Rainfall in San Francisco 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.)