Report an error
Points scored by the Buffalo Bills correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Popularity of the 'i am once again' meme | r=0.8 | 18yrs | No |
Google searches for 'President phone number' | r=0.74 | 20yrs | No |
Searches for 'never gonna give you up' | r=0.69 | 18yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Whitley | r=0.65 | 41yrs | Yes! |
The number of movies Denzel Washington appeared in | r=0.62 | 47yrs | No |
Points scored by the Buffalo Bills 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.)