Two-Part Analysis is one of the five question types in the GMAT Focus Data Insights section. You get a short scenario and a table of options with two columns, and you choose one option for each column. The two answers are linked: often they are two unknowns in the same problem, or two roles, such as the statement that most strengthens an argument and the one that most weakens it. You must get both parts right to earn credit.
The quantitative versions are really small algebra problems. Name the two unknowns, write the relationships the scenario gives, and solve. When the algebra is awkward, use the options: test pairs from the list, starting with values that satisfy the easier condition. The on-screen calculator is available in Data Insights, but setting up the right equations matters far more than arithmetic speed.
The verbal versions behave like Critical Reasoning. Identify the conclusion and the gap, then evaluate each option against each column separately. The same option can be the answer to both columns, so do not rule one out just because you have already chosen it.
The classic trap is swapping the columns: finding both values correctly and assigning each to the wrong heading. Read the column headers again before you commit.
3 practice questions
Two-Part Analysis (TPA)Mixture ProblemsEasy
Question 1
A roaster blends two coffees to make a 30-kilogram batch. Coffee K costs $14 per kilogram and coffee R costs $8 per kilogram. The finished batch contains only these two coffees and costs, on average, $11.60 per kilogram.
In the table, select the number of kilograms of coffee K and the number of kilograms of coffee R in the batch. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Coffee K
Coffee R
Option
○
○
6 kg
○
○
10 kg
○
○
12 kg
○
○
15 kg
○
○
18 kg
○
○
20 kg
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: Coffee K: 18 kg; Coffee R: 12 kg
Key Concept or Approach
Two unknowns, two equations: one for total weight and one for total cost. Total cost = 30 × 11.60 = $348.
Step-by-Step Solution
Step 1: Let k and r be the kilograms of K and R. Then k + r = 30 and 14k + 8r = 348.
Step 2: Substitute r = 30 − k: 14k + 240 − 8k = 348, so 6k = 108 and k = 18.
City planner: Last year, Harlow converted two downtown traffic lanes into protected bike lanes. Since then, weekday revenue at downtown shops has risen 12 percent. So the bike lanes caused the rise in downtown shop revenue, and other cities that want to revive downtown retail should build protected bike lanes.
In the table, select the statement that would most strengthen the planner's argument and the statement that would most weaken it. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Most strengthens
Most weakens
Option
○
○
Over the same period, weekday shop revenue in Harlow's suburban districts, where no roads were changed, fell slightly.
○
○
Last year a large downtown office complex reopened after a two-year renovation, bringing about 3,000 workers back downtown on weekdays.
○
○
Several downtown shop owners publicly opposed the bike lanes before they were built.
○
○
Protected bike lanes cost less to build than a downtown parking garage of similar size.
○
○
Harlow painted its new bike lanes green to make them more visible to drivers.
○
○
Some cities have built protected bike lanes in residential neighborhoods rather than downtown.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: Most strengthens: Over the same period, weekday shop revenue in Harlow's suburban districts, where no roads were changed, fell slightly.; Most weakens: Last year a large downtown office complex reopened after a two-year renovation, bringing about 3,000 workers back downtown on weekdays.
Key Concept or Approach
The planner concludes cause (bike lanes) from a before-and-after correlation (revenue up 12 percent). A strengthener rules out other explanations; a weakener supplies a plausible alternative cause for the same rise.
Step-by-Step Solution
Statement 1 (suburban revenue fell): Areas without the change did not see the rise, so a citywide boom is unlikely to explain the downtown increase. This supports the bike lanes as the cause. Strengthens.
Statement 2 (office complex reopened): 3,000 weekday workers returning downtown is an alternative reason for higher weekday shop revenue. Weakens.
Statement 3 (owners opposed the lanes): Their opinions before construction say nothing about what caused later revenue. Irrelevant.
Statement 4 (cheaper than a garage): Cost does not bear on whether the lanes raised revenue. Irrelevant.
Statement 5 (painted green): A design detail with no link to revenue. Irrelevant.
Statement 6 (residential lanes elsewhere): The recommendation is about downtown lanes; lanes elsewhere neither help nor hurt the causal claim. Irrelevant.
Final Answer
Most strengthens: the suburban revenue statement. Most weakens: the office complex statement.
Common trap: Picking the shop owners' opposition as a weakener: opinions before construction do not explain later revenue.
Working together at their constant rates, pumps A and B fill an empty tank in 2 hours 24 minutes. Working alone, pump A takes 2 hours less than pump B to fill the same empty tank.
In the table, select the number of hours pump A would take to fill the tank alone and the number of hours pump B would take to fill the tank alone. Make only two selections, one in each column.
Pump A alone
Pump B alone
Option
○
○
2 hours
○
○
3 hours
○
○
4 hours
○
○
5 hours
○
○
6 hours
○
○
8 hours
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: Pump A alone: 4 hours; Pump B alone: 6 hours
Key Concept or Approach
Rates add: if A alone takes a hours and B alone takes b hours, together they fill 1/a + 1/b of the tank per hour. 2 hours 24 minutes = 2.4 hours, so the combined rate is 1/2.4 = 5/12 tank per hour.
