99%
narrower than your guess. The data narrowed the range by 99% and the model settled cleanly.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $1.23 ($0.93–$1.72)
This was a quick preview. It is wrong in a known direction — every range below is narrower than the truth, so it looks more certain than it is. Run it in full before you quote anything.
The pale shape is what you believed before the model saw anything. The solid shape is what it concluded afterwards. If the solid shape is much narrower, your data taught it something. If it sits in the same place at the same width, the number is your own assumption dressed up as a result — and you should treat it that way.
99%
narrower than your guess. The data narrowed the range by 99% and the model settled cleanly.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $1.23 ($0.93–$1.72)
97%
narrower than your guess. The data narrowed the range by 97% and the model settled cleanly.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $0.83 ($0.46–$1.61)
97%
narrower than your guess. The data narrowed the range by 97% and the model settled cleanly.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $0.87 ($0.47–$1.62)
96%
narrower than your guess. This channel's spending pattern closely tracks another's, so the split of credit between them is uncertain.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $1.38 ($0.82–$2.25)
95%
narrower than your guess. The data narrowed the range by 95% and the model settled cleanly.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $0.79 ($0.39–$1.66)
93%
narrower than your guess. The data narrowed the range by 93% and the model settled cleanly.
guessed $1.22 · concluded $0.97 ($0.46–$2.18)
Every period’s outcome split into the baseline the business would have earned anyway and the incremental effect of each channel. The black line is what actually happened. Each channel’s weeks add up to exactly the contribution reported on the overview — this is the same calculation, drawn out over time rather than summed. The shaded band at the right was held out of the fit entirely, so the model was never shown it.