vetratten t1_ja79hfy wrote
Item to note, you mix your abbreviations and it becomes clunky.
So .9B on one item but then 158M on the other vs 900M and 158M (or .9B and .158B to keep in line with the rest of the chart).
IncomeStatementGuy OP t1_ja7ewvh wrote
Thanks for the feedback.
My rule was to switch to millions for 0.1B and 0.0B as in these cases the billion digit carries little information compared to the size of the number.
Which exact rule would you use instead?
wanmoar t1_ja7n06w wrote
You could’ve used either just millions or, if that would make the numbers unclear, use billions but to the second decimal.
IncomeStatementGuy OP t1_ja82474 wrote
Thanks, I'll play more with these options in my next creation. In general, I like having only a few digits as it makes the numbers quicker to read.
wanmoar t1_ja83g8v wrote
Is it really quicker to read if people have to do the extra work of checking for the M or B?
vetratten t1_ja7i7tt wrote
Depends on the data and audience and usually we put in a means to switch between thousands, millions, billions on our dashboards.
For a static like this where the numbers have such a wide range I'm torn as I usually prefer everything to be the same notation. The beauty of the Sankey is you could keep the notation by step. So for instance the far right step being in Millions but the middle step in Billions. It's not perfect by any stretch and I'd still be annoyed that they're not all in billions.
IncomeStatementGuy OP t1_ja829kx wrote
Thanks for the suggestion :-)
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments