Audited 31 Jul 2026·Last updated 28 Oct 2026·3 citations·Tier 2·0 uses

Spearman's Rank Correlation Calculator

Paste two comma-separated lists of paired values to get Spearman's rank correlation rho, with tied values given average ranks, plus the number of pairs used.

Spearman's Rank Correlation Calculator

Spearman rho
-1
Spearman's rank correlation, from −1 for exactly reversed order to +1 for identical order.
Pair count
5
Model scope
Descriptive monotonic rank association with average ranks for ties; it does not establish causation, provide a p-value, handle censoring or survey weights, or validate sampling assumptions.

Background.

Two judges score the same ten wines. A teacher wants to know whether pupils who rank high in maths also rank high in music. A biologist suspects that bigger nests hold more eggs but doubts the relationship is a straight line. In each case the question is not whether one quantity rises by a fixed amount for each step in the other, but simply whether the two tend to move in the same order. Spearman's rank correlation measures exactly that.

The method throws away the actual values and keeps only their order. Each list is replaced by ranks — 1 for the smallest, 2 for the next, and so on — and the ordinary Pearson correlation is calculated on those ranks. The result, rho, runs from −1 to +1. A value of +1 means the two lists are in exactly the same order; −1 means one is the exact reverse of the other; values near 0 mean the order of one says little about the order of the other.

Working with ranks buys two useful properties. Any relationship that only ever goes up, or only ever goes down, scores a perfect ±1 even if it curves sharply: y = x³ over the numbers 1 to 5 gives rho of exactly 1, where Pearson's coefficient on the raw values is only about 0.943. And one wild value cannot dominate, because the largest number in a list is simply ranked last however extreme it is.

The price is that rho ignores how far apart the values are, and it cannot see a relationship that rises and then falls. It is also a description of the data in front of you; it does not tell you whether the pattern would hold in a larger sample, and it says nothing about cause.

What is spearman's rank correlation calculator?

Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, written ρ or r_s, is the Pearson correlation coefficient computed on the ranks of two paired variables rather than on their values. It measures the strength and direction of a monotonic association: how consistently one variable increases, or decreases, as the other increases. Values tied within a list share the average of the ranks they would otherwise occupy.

How to use this calculator.

  1. Type or paste the first variable into X values as numbers separated by commas, for example 12, 15.5, 9, 20. Line breaks or spaces alone will not separate values.
  2. Enter the second variable into Y values in the same order, so that the first Y belongs to the same person, item or occasion as the first X.
  3. Check that both lists have the same length and at least three pairs, and that neither list consists of a single repeated value, since a variable with no variation cannot be ranked meaningfully.
  4. Read rho and the pair count. The sign gives the direction of the association and the size its consistency; the page does not test whether it is statistically significant.

The formula.

rho_s = Pearson correlation of the paired average ranks

Each list is sorted and every value replaced by its position, starting at 1. Where several values are equal, each receives the average of the positions they occupy, so two values tied for 1st and 2nd both get 1.5. Rho is then the Pearson correlation of the two rank lists: the sum of the products of each pair's deviations from the mean rank, divided by the square root of the product of the two sums of squared deviations. When there are no ties this equals the textbook shortcut ρ = 1 − 6Σd² ÷ [n(n² − 1)], where d is the difference between a pair's two ranks and n the number of pairs. With ties the shortcut drifts slightly, which is why the full Pearson form is used here.

A worked example.

Example

Enter X values 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and Y values 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The X ranks are 1 to 5 in order; the Y ranks are 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. Both have a mean rank of 3, so the X deviations are −2, −1, 0, 1, 2 and the Y deviations are 2, 1, 0, −1, −2. Their products sum to −4 − 1 + 0 − 1 − 4 = −10, and each list's squared deviations sum to 10. Rho is −10 ÷ √(10 × 10) = −1, a perfect reversal of order across 5 pairs. The shortcut agrees: the rank differences squared are 16, 4, 0, 4, 16, totalling 40, and 1 − 6 × 40 ÷ (5 × 24) = −1. Swap just the last two Y values, to 5, 4, 3, 1, 2, and rho moves to −0.9.

y Values5, 4, 3, 2, 1
x Values1, 2, 3, 4, 5

Frequently asked questions.

When should I use Spearman instead of Pearson correlation?
Use Spearman when your data are ranks or ordered categories, when the relationship looks curved but consistently rising or falling, or when a few extreme values would dominate Pearson. With X of 1 to 5 and Y of 1, 2, 3, 4, 100, Spearman gives 1 while Pearson gives only about 0.725.
How are tied values handled?
Tied values share the average of the ranks they span. For Y values 2, 2, 3, 5, 4 the two 2s each get rank 1.5. Against X of 1 to 5, the page's Pearson-on-ranks method gives about 0.872, whereas the no-ties shortcut formula would give 0.875; the gap grows as ties become more common.
Can rho be +1 even though the points do not lie on a straight line?
Yes. Rho is +1 whenever every increase in X is matched by an increase in Y, whatever the shape of the curve. Values of y = x³ for x from 1 to 5 give rho of exactly 1, while Pearson's coefficient on the same raw numbers is about 0.943 because the points bend away from a line.
Is a rho of −1 from only five pairs convincing?
It is more convincing than it looks, but small samples deserve caution. Five values can be arranged in 120 orders, and only one of them is a perfect reversal, so pure chance produces rho of exactly −1 about once in 120 shuffles. With fewer pairs, or a less extreme rho, chance explains much more.
Why does the page refuse my data?
The two lists must contain the same number of comma-separated numbers, at least three pairs, and some variation in each list. Rho is undefined when every X or every Y is identical, because there is no order to compare. Check for a stray trailing comma, which counts as an empty value.

How this page was produced

Published by
Quanta Calculator
Primary sources
3 cited below
Method
rho_s = Pearson correlation of the paired average ranks
Published
Last verified

Built with AI assistance and verified by automated tests against the cited sources — every worked example on this page is computed by the same code that runs the calculator. How we build and check calculators.

In this category

Embed

Quanta Pro

Paid features are coming later.

  • All 1560 calculators remain free
  • No billing is enabled
Coming soon