Report an error
Height of Miss Universe Pageant winner correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of cooks, short order in Tennessee | r=0.92 | 11yrs | No |
The number of travel agents in Michigan | r=0.88 | 11yrs | No |
The number of private detectives in Delaware | r=0.85 | 11yrs | No |
The number of private detectives in Ohio | r=0.79 | 11yrs | No |
Air quality in Carbondale, Illinois | r=0.78 | 7yrs | No |
The number of vending machine repairers in New Hampshire | r=0.75 | 11yrs | No |
Google searches for 'XL tee shirts' | r=0.64 | 10yrs | No |
Gasoline pumped in Former Czechoslovakia | r=0.62 | 13yrs | No |
Google's Net Income | r=0.56 | 10yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to get to antartica' | r=0.54 | 10yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Kayley | r=0.48 | 37yrs | No |
The number of movies Jim Carrey appeared in | r=0.47 | 33yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Kailey | r=0.45 | 34yrs | No |
Google searches for 'Titanic' | r=-0.94 | 6yrs | No |
Height of Miss Universe Pageant winner 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.)