Report an error
Popularity of the first name Rubi correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| Votes for Libertarian Senators in Alabama | r=0.99 | 6yrs | No |
| The number of judicial law clerks in New York | r=0.95 | 12yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'snoop dog' | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
| The number of compensation and benefits managers in District of Columbia | r=0.93 | 19yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'Tamagotchi' | r=0.93 | 15yrs | No |
| The number of authors in Missouri | r=0.93 | 20yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'learn spanish' | r=0.9 | 19yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'housing prices' | r=0.89 | 15yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'Britney Spears' | r=0.85 | 15yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'why isnt 11 pronounced onety one' | r=0.8 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Rubi 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.)