Report an error
Burglaries in North Carolina correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Bachelor's degrees awarded in linguistics | r=0.99 | 10yrs | No |
| Milk consumption | r=0.99 | 32yrs | No |
| The number of payroll and timekeeping clerks in North Carolina | r=0.97 | 20yrs | No |
| The number of executive administrative assistants in North Carolina | r=0.96 | 13yrs | No |
| Associates degrees awarded in Business | r=0.96 | 11yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'desktop background' | r=0.96 | 16yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Anthony | r=0.96 | 38yrs | No |
| Gasoline pumped in Sweden | r=0.96 | 38yrs | No |
| Pirate attacks globally | r=0.93 | 14yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Nickolas | r=0.91 | 38yrs | No |
| Remaining Forest Cover in the Brazilian Amazon | r=0.87 | 36yrs | No |
Burglaries in North Carolina 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.)
