I recently received a request from James, who was interested in a formula-based solution to the following problem: given a two-dimensional range containing a mixture of numbers and empty cells (which I am defining as being either “genuinely” empty or as containing the null string “” as a result of formulas in those cells), generate a unique list of those numbers in order of their frequency within that range, with the most frequent first. What’s more, if two or more numbers occur the same number of times within that range, then they should be listed in order of their size from smallest to largest.
For example, for the dataset in A1:F6 below, we would return the list as given beginning in I1.
I recently made the post here, in which I presented a solution to the problem of returning a value based upon matching a single criterion in a given column across multiple worksheets.
In this follow-up post I will look at the analogous case in which we are not matching a single criterion, but several. As mentioned in the first instalment, I will look at two solutions to this problem, one in which we make use of an extra “helper” column in each of the relevant worksheets, and one in which we do without such aids.
We usually face no problems in cases where we wish to apply a formula to, not just one, but an array of values. And of course we do this by simply committing the formula as an array formula, i.e. with CSE.
However, not all formulas yield so easily, and some stubbornly resist any attempts at coercing an array of returns from them. Here I would like to discuss some techniques which, in addition to array-entry, can help coerce the desired result.
The principal method in such cases is to use a construction involving OFFSET, though a set-up using INDEX is equally viable; indeed, due to its non-volatility, perhaps even preferable. Some cases may require even more coercion than that, and others less. But the one thing they all share in common is that, on its own, array-entry just isn’t enough!
In this post I would like to clear up what appears to me to be a rather widespread misunderstanding of how COUNTIFS/SUMIFS operate, in particular when we pass arrays consisting of more than one element as the Criteria to one or even two of the Criteria_Ranges.
This latter technique is used when the criteria in question are to be considered as “OR” criteria, which is not to be confused with cases where we wish the criteria passed to be calculated rather as “AND” critieria.
For example, given the following data: