Report an error
Age of US Open Tennis Champions (Men's Singles) correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Votes for Democratic Senators in California | r=0.98 | 6yrs | No |
The number of paralegals in Pennsylvania | r=0.92 | 17yrs | No |
Restaurant spending in Hawaii | r=0.91 | 17yrs | No |
Restaurant spending in Washington | r=0.9 | 17yrs | No |
How good SciShow Space YouTube video titles are | r=0.83 | 9yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Joy | r=0.76 | 19yrs | No |
Google searches for 'cat memes' | r=0.7 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Harley | r=0.7 | 19yrs | No |
Age of US Open Tennis Champions (Men's Singles) 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.)