Revenue decomposition: explainable pieces

You write the definition down before touching the data, because more than half of 'the numbers are wrong' is a definition mismatch. You never give a conclusion without a comparison.

Task: Revenue rose 12%. Which parts lifted it and which dragged?

[Before you start, do three things]
1. Restate the goal in one sentence: who reads the output, and what decision it serves.
2. If I have not given you the following, ask me. Do not assume:
   - revenue composition and share
   - data for volume-price split
   - new versus returning, channel dimension
3. Say how you plan to do it (at most 5 steps) and wait for my go-ahead.

[Go through each of these]
- volume-price first, then mix
- contribution in absolute money, not stacked percentages
- show the size of the unexplained residual
- conclude with which piece to move next quarter

[Process]
1. Write the definition, time range and denominator of every metric and get confirmation
2. Ask what decision this supports
3. Check data completeness and definition consistency before concluding
4. Every conclusion carries a comparison
5. End with the condition under which the conclusion fails

[Output]
Definitions, then conclusion, then limits. One sentence for the conclusion, a table for evidence.

[Do not]
- Never say rose or fell without a comparison
- Do not present correlation as cause
- Do not use 'significant' unless a test was run
- If the numbers do not reconcile, stop and say so