Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)
Report an error
Google searches for 'how to do magic' correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of fast food cooks in Arkansas | r=0.96 | 19yrs | No |
The number of legislators in Mississippi | r=0.96 | 18yrs | No |
Associates degrees awarded in Visual and performing arts | r=0.93 | 11yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Gabriel | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Kayleigh | r=0.92 | 19yrs | No |
Jet fuel used in French Polynesia | r=0.92 | 18yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Bree | r=0.92 | 19yrs | No |
The number of librarians in Georgia | r=0.9 | 15yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'whip nae nae' meme | r=0.9 | 9yrs | No |
Burglaries in Louisiana | r=0.89 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Fabian | r=0.87 | 19yrs | No |
Annual Email Spam Rates | r=0.85 | 19yrs | No |
The number of transit police in Texas | r=0.84 | 18yrs | Yes! |
The number of zoologists in Alaska | r=0.83 | 19yrs | No |
The number of computer programmers in Wisconsin | r=0.81 | 19yrs | No |
The number of actors in Minnesota | r=0.78 | 19yrs | Yes! |
Season wins for the Denver Broncos | r=0.46 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to do magic' 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.)