First Look Data is ready! A Look at Alpha & Leader Tables

Sorry for the absence--I was waiting for First Look data to continue my custom graphing explanation. OK, OK...that's not true...I just got behind on other things and neglected the blog. I apologize to the Custom Graphing Jedi-in-training. I hope you continued your studies while I was gone.

But, it is true that First Look is ready. I just downloaded the First Look file and now have over 3,000 credit unions to analyze using 2Q data. For you data & analysis nerds out there, now is the time to start raggin' on your colleagues that DON'T use Peer. Light up the CFO listserv with 2Q fun facts that only YOU know, while they struggle to use NCUA.gov to get data. Ok, enough trash talking. Back to Custom Graphing.

Where were we? I've covered all the Single Credit Union or Peer Group charts, as well as the various Historical tables. Let's move on to Lists under both All Comparisons and Detailed. First a quick note about the difference between the two sections.

All Comparisons: By default, these graphs will show data for the primary and any comparisons you have selected. The CUs within those Peer Groups, by default, do NOT show on these charts. However, you can add them simply by selecting "Include all credit unions that comprise the selected comparisons" on the Account Selection screen. In essense, you've just upgraded to the Detailed group of graphs.

Detailed: By default, these graphs will show data for the primary and ALL the CUs that make up the comparisons, but NOT show the comparisons if they are an aggregated Peer Group. You can also add in the Peer Group averages by selecting "Just show selected comparisons" on the Account Selection screen. This is really mislabled in this case and should "Also include selected comparisons". I'll suggest that to the team.

Wow. I'm tired just writing that. Ok, on to the custom graphs. Alpha & Leader Tables.

Basically the same thing, but one sorts the data alphabetically by default; the other sorts by the first account code, highest to lowest, to create a ranking report. Pretty straightforward. In addition to the difference listed above (All Comparisons v. Detailed), you can always click on any column header to sort the data by that row. So, for accounts where LOWER is better (delinquency, efficiency etc.), just click that column header to reverse the listing.

Custom Graphing: Ranking Report (ex. Productivity & Efficiency)

The Standing Report is easy to explain and one of the most helpful and powerful tables you can build in Peer 2. Understanding its power is key to gaining Jedi Knight status. But this post comes with a warning: you must use this Force for Good. Do not lured to the Dark Side. There is great temptation to keep its power secret from your colleagues so that you look all-knowing and powerful, while they slave away using excel spreadsheets for hours to produce similar information.

This report answers the question "What is your standing compared to your peers?."

So what does it show? The Standing Report compares your primary CUs performance in however many areas you want against all other CUs in the comparison sets. It shows your actual performance, rank out of the total # of CUs, the other CUs' average performance and what percentile your performance falls into.

Let's look at Productivity & Efficiency to tie together what you learned earlier in the week with the Formula Wizard post and today's lesson.

Begin by selecting the Standing Report. Click on the binocular image on the first line and navigate to Ratio & Scoring --> Productivity & Efficiency.
Double-click on each formula you want to include on the report (you'll see each one you select pop into the window at the bottom.
If you want to do more than 15 rows, you'll have to go back to the Account Selection screen and click "insert" for each new line you want to add (annoying).
When done, give your table a title and select either Preview or Save. Voila! (my new favorite word).
If you want to see how another CU in the comparison set performs, just use the drop down menu on the graph (which regrettably is sorting in descending asset order rather than alphabetically...submitted to fix desk).

More on Peer Groups: Simple v. Custom, Dynamic v. Static...

On Friday, I described the difference between a Dynamic and a Static Peer Group. How does this relate to Simple v. Custom? Let's take a look.

Simple Build: this is great for credit unions that want to hand-select a list of credit unions to use as a Peer Group. This is pretty common...a CEO has a set of credit unions s/he likes to keep an eye on. Use simple build to just select them one-by-one.

What does this have to do with Dynamic v. Static? Well, all Simple Build PGs are considered "static" because the only criteria you chose was the credit unions themselves. The program stores the secret-ID and you're off to the races.

Now, with Custom Built PGs, you have a choice. You can save the criteria (all CUs between $20 and 50 million, in California, who use Fiserv as a DP) by choosing "Dynamic"; or you can chose "static" so you can compare the performance of these same 28 credit unions over time, even if at some point they grow above the $50m or chose a different Data Processor. (Try to build this group...see if you get the same answer...)

One thing to note: when you save a Custom Built PG as a Static PG and you decide to edit it at any point in the future, Peer 2.0 will open the PG using the Simple Build feature. (Confused?) That's because when you chose "Static" it just saved the secret-IDs...so the next time around, Peer doesn't remember the criteria you originally selected. It would be cool if it did (eg. It still opens in Simple Build but says "the original criteria was..." But that's for the upgrade list. Daniel? are you listening? :))

One last thing: custom peer groups are saved with a (D) or an (S) after the name...can you now guess what that stands for?

Tomorrow....Custom graphing.