Report an error
New York Yankees' victories correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Wins for the New York Yankees | r=1 | 48yrs | No |
Liquefied petroleum gas used in Central African Republic | r=0.91 | 14yrs | Yes! |
Runs scored by the New York Yankees | r=0.88 | 48yrs | No |
The number of fire inspectors in Iowa | r=0.79 | 17yrs | No |
The divorce rate in Rhode Island | r=0.76 | 23yrs | No |
Wins for the Boston Red Sox | r=0.69 | 48yrs | No |
Air pollution in Muskogee, Oklahoma | r=0.69 | 34yrs | Yes! |
Runs scored by the Chicago Cubs | r=0.68 | 48yrs | No |
Wins for the New York Yankees | r=0.68 | 48yrs | No |
Runs scored by the Atlanta Braves | r=0.67 | 48yrs | No |
Runs scored by the New York Mets | r=0.58 | 48yrs | No |
Wins for the San Francisco Giants | r=0.54 | 48yrs | Yes! |
Popularity of the first name Lillian | r=0.19 | 48yrs | No |
Biomass power generated in Papua New Guinea | r=-0.38 | 22yrs | No |
New York Yankees' victories 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.)