Research

Compare segment performance in Excel

Compare groups using consistent metrics, denominators, coverage, and minimum sample rules

7 min setupTested with:ChatGPTReviewed: 2026-08-28

Add your context

Your text stays in this browser. AILesson Prompts does not send it to a model or server.

Decision and comparison groupsMetric definitionsCoverage and sample values

Your prompt

Unfilled fields remain visible as placeholders, so you can still copy and edit the prompt

Design an Excel comparison across regions, products, channels, or other segments.

Decision and groups:
[decision]

Metric definitions and denominators:
[metrics]

Coverage, group sizes, missingness, and representative totals:
[data]

Require the same time window, inclusion rules, currency, and metric definition across groups. Show volume beside rates, use weighted totals rather than averaging percentages, and flag small or incomplete groups. Return a PivotTable or formula plan, ranking rules only when justified, contribution-versus-efficiency views, and questions that need deeper investigation. Do not infer that the segment itself caused the difference.

Private by defaultPrompt assembly happens locally in your browser. Avoid placing confidential information into any AI service unless your organization allows it.

From input to outcome

A worked example

See how concrete context turns this recipe into a usable result

Actual input

Decision and comparison groups: Choose which acquisition channel needs optimization, not simply which should receive more budget. Compare Search, Partner, and Email for Q2 2026.
Metric definitions: Visits, completed purchases, conversion rate=purchases/visits, net revenue in GBP, and revenue per visit. Higher is better for both rates. Refunds are already removed from net revenue.
Coverage and sample values: Search: 100,000 visits, 3,200 purchases, £240,000. Partner: 20,000, 900, £81,000. Email: 5,000, 300, £33,000. Email tracking covers only 80% of sends; the other channels are complete.

Example output

Use a PivotTable with Channel as rows and sums of Visits, Purchases, and NetRevenue. Add calculated results outside the PivotTable: Conversion = Purchases/Visits and RevenuePerVisit = NetRevenue/Visits. Recompute the total from summed numerators and denominators.

Channel	Visits	Purchases	Conversion	Revenue	Revenue/visit	Coverage
Search	100,000	3,200	3.2%	£240,000	£2.40	Complete
Partner	20,000	900	4.5%	£81,000	£4.05	Complete
Email	5,000	300	6.0%	£33,000	£6.60	80% tracking

Search contributes the most purchases and revenue but is least efficient on the two supplied rates. Partner is stronger on efficiency with meaningful volume. Email has the highest observed rates but cannot be fairly ranked until its missing tracking is understood. Overall conversion is 4,400/125,000 = 3.52%, not the average of 3.2%, 4.5%, and 6.0%. Investigate Search landing pages and traffic mix first for optimization; test whether Email's uncovered sends differ systematically. These differences do not prove that channel choice caused conversion.

Why this works

1
Volume and denominator visibility prevents tiny segments from winning misleading rankings.
2
Separating contribution from efficiency supports different operational decisions.