Report an error
Votes for Democratic Senators in Georgia correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Solar power generated in Kazakhstan | r=0.99 | 4yrs | Yes! |
Wind power generated in Thailand | r=0.96 | 9yrs | No |
Google searches for 'Bratz Dolls' | r=0.95 | 6yrs | No |
Solar power generated in Mozambique | r=0.9 | 4yrs | Yes! |
The number of welders in Georgia | r=0.88 | 7yrs | No |
Sun Life Financial's stock price (SLF) | r=0.86 | 8yrs | No |
Google searches for 'how to trap a spider' | r=0.83 | 6yrs | No |
Customer satisfaction with AT&T | r=0.76 | 7yrs | No |
Cheddar cheese consumption | r=0.74 | 11yrs | No |
Annual US household spending on meats, poultry, fish, and eggs | r=0.74 | 9yrs | No |
Votes for Democratic Senators in Georgia 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.)