May
14
2007
Update: Google Analytics Team, please don’t do this anymore
. I just turned on the ‘compare to past’ feature and noticed that you are doubling up series on the sparklines. This is a big no-no as far as I am concerned because the sparkline with mutliple series on it just ends up looking like a squiggle. The data from the second series actually becomes chart junk!
If your a visual analysis wonk like me you probably couldn’t help but be excited with the new version of Google Analytics and the introduction of Sparklines. To me, it comes across as a major endorsement of sparklines as a business tool.
But, for this implementation to be a useful endorsement of sparklines, they have to show value as a tool and I don’t think the GA implementation is quite there – yet. Remember the new version of GA is in Beta so the team has lots of opportunity to improve.
From the Visitor Summary Report…
In this case, the shaded area is not useful, it’s distracting. The reason for this is relatively simple – it’s shading the area under the curve (plotted line) in the case of a sparkline, the shaded area should code more or different information. I’d really like so see this shaded area represent some UCL and LCL data, for instance the standard deviation (plus or minus) from the mean of all values.
The value currently associated with the sparklines are the total or total average for the period represented when they should be the current (or most recent) value.
I’d like to see some data markers on the chart – current value, high water mark and low water mark. Of course, the markers should be color coded to their value on the right. So, for instance the most current data point marker could be red and the current value would also be in red. The high and low water marks would be different colors and their associated text would be those colors to tie them together.
If that’s as clear as mud, here’s a quick example:
Notice that my example is a bit longer, this is because Tufte recommends shooting for a 45 degree angle on the line slopes (it eases understanding)
- The gray area represents the ‘normal’ distribution of visitors – the "biorhythm" as Avinash would say and it is the mean +/- 1 Standard Deviation
- Both the oldest point (starting point) and newest point (end point) are marked in red
- The watermarks (high and low) are marked in green
- For each of the data points that are marked (except for the starting point) an associated value is presented to the right and is color coded so that associations between the chart and the values are easily made
Finally, I’d like to see the sparklines be more contextual to the report or dashboard that they are in. For instance, I’m not quite sure why total page views is reported in the Visitor report. Also, is that average page views per visit or page views per visitor? I’d rather see average visits per visitor and average usage days per visitor (daily visitors divided by absolute unique visitors) than some of these other metrics.
What do you think of the Google Analytics sparklines?

[...] Clint Ivy at Instant Cognition breaks it down. [...]
[...] Clint Ivy at Instant Cognition breaks it down. [...]
Clint, I love your example sparkline and fully agree that while GA’s implementation of sparklines is a big step in the right direction there is still some walking to do. Nice work talking a good concept and telling Google how to make it great.
Eric T. Peterson
http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com
Great example, Clint. I’m a fan of sparklines but couldn’t put my finger on why the GA beta sparklines weren’t quite doing it for me. You nailed it.
The “compare to past” sparkline is a riot!
thanks Bob! It was a good thing I wasn’t eating when I discovered that particular ‘feature’…
Right on, Clint. The shading under the line graphs is pretty darn useless. I would much rather see an x-day moving average overlaid on the line graph, much like those shown in the profile stats for users of http://www.walkertracker.com/. I’m trying not to have a knee-jerk reaction to interface changes, as today is the first time I’ve seen them on my own reports…
That disclaimer aside, I do have to say that I really don’t care for the new geo-map overlay. While I do like that it’s clickable, a shortcoming of the prior version, it feels pretty cumbersome to me and the text links for “detail level” offered are inconsistent from one zoom level to the next, a VERY big usability no-no. The new paradigm of zooming out with a magnifying glass but zooming in with text links is just plain counterintuitive; why can’t we have controls of both kinds in both zoom directions?
While I know this is really trivial, it’s also terribly depressing to me how badly distorted Michigan appears. A lot of the usefulness of the graphic is destroyed by the distortion – no more at-a-glance comprehension; I can’t tell where the land ends and the lakes begin, so I’ve completely lost my frame of reference for the west side of the state and everything “up north.” Not cool.
The rest, however, I’m looking forward to exploring. It is indeed pretty!
Andrea,
I agree the maps are quite confusing. Since when is Greenland part of the Americas or Central/Eastern Russia part of Europe? If I remember my Geography, Greenland is the ‘largest island’ in the world and not affiliated with a continental group. Furthermore, the division between Europe and Asia falls in the Ural mountains. I hadn’t even noticed the distortion of the states Michigan is particularly bad.
I don’t think I’m going to tackle the overall usability issues though and instead will continue to focus on the infographics.
BTW, I do like the moving average on walkertracker but have to wonder about the use of area graphs…;~)
In this case, I think there are usability issues for both the interface and the infographics. I actually reined in my usability-related comments!
Misrepresenting geographic regions is not only confusing when you try to read the infographic, but it is also alienating to the people who live in those misrepresented regions. But since the graphics include the lakes as though they were landmass, how did they decide whether to credit non-existent visits from the middle of the Great Lakes to Michigan versus other lake-adjacent areas like Wisconsin, Ontario, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and New York? Looks like convenience to me, and that’s never a good answer when it comes to useful data representations!
The area graph representations on Walker Tracker may not be the best choice, but they are glanceable, and that’s one of my primary criteria for usefulness. I think that in some cases (like the simple two-variable same-scale trend graph) it can be easier to understand with a very quick look since there’s more visual differentiation between the variables. I am not aware of any analytics packages that show a moving average, though I think it could be very useful for comparing short-term trends to daily patterns or long-term to short-term trends.
Very interesting critics!
I will try to use your advice carefully on Piwik (open source web analytics)
hey guys,want to improve the quality of your Sparkline charts? look what i have found visifire,/a> an amazing charting component powered by silverlight offered under open source just for free
@blee55: and all, this link on the Visifire blog is probably more helpful than the main site.