GMAT Data Insights Questions: All 5 Types Explained
The GMAT Data Insights section has 5 question types: Data Sufficiency, Table Analysis, Graphics Interpretation, Multi-Source Reasoning, and Two-Part Analysis. This page gives you 22 worked practice questions across all...
The GMAT Data Insights section has 5 question types: Data Sufficiency, Table Analysis, Graphics Interpretation, Multi-Source Reasoning, and Two-Part Analysis. This page gives you 22 worked practice questions across all 5 types, tagged Easy, Medium, and Hard, with a difficulty filter and answer reveal so you can test yourself before reading each solution.
Most GMAT practice resources give you one or two token examples per question type and move on. That isn’t enough to build real fluency in Data Insights, where five very different question types demand five completely different mental approaches. This page fills that gap. If you’re still getting familiar with the GMAT Focus Edition format overall, that guide covers the full picture. Here you’ll find practice questions for every DI type, organised by difficulty, with step-by-step reasoning behind each answer. Use the difficulty filter to focus on where you need the most work, and treat each explanation as a strategy lesson rather than just an answer key.
Take Crackverbal’s free GMAT diagnostic test to see which question types cost you the most time and marks. Under 10 minutes.
What Is the GMAT Data Insights Section?
One of three equally-weighted scored sections in the GMAT Focus Edition.
The Data Insights section replaced the old GMAT’s Integrated Reasoning section and absorbed Data Sufficiency from the Quantitative section. It is scored on the same 60–90 scale as Quant and Verbal, and carries equal weight in your total GMAT Focus score. For a complete breakdown of the section, including scoring, pacing, and how each type fits into the 45-minute window, read our GMAT Data Insights guide. This page focuses purely on practice: questions, solutions, and the reasoning patterns behind them.
| Question Type | Format | Typical Frequency | What It Tests |
|---|---|---|---|
| Data Sufficiency | 5 fixed answer choices (A–E) | ~6–8 questions | Whether two statements provide enough data to answer a question |
| Table Analysis | Sortable table + True/False statements | ~3–4 questions | Reading and interpreting tabular data accurately |
| Graphics Interpretation | Chart or graph + drop-down completions | ~4–5 questions | Extracting precise values and trends from visual data |
| Multi-Source Reasoning | 2–3 tabbed sources + 2–3 questions | ~4–5 questions | Synthesising information across multiple sources |
| Two-Part Analysis | Table with two linked answer columns | ~3–4 questions | Solving inter-dependent two-part problems |
How to Use This Practice Set
Filter by difficulty, attempt first, then reveal the reasoning.
Each question below is tagged with a difficulty level. Use the filter buttons within each section to focus on the level that challenges you most. Click Show Answer & Explanation to reveal the full reasoning after you’ve attempted the question yourself — reading the explanation before attempting it is the fastest way to make this practice less useful.
Data Sufficiency Practice Questions
You’re not solving for the answer — you’re deciding whether the statements give you enough to answer definitively.
The five answer choices never change — memorise them: (A) Statement (1) alone is sufficient, (2) is not. (B) Statement (2) alone is sufficient, (1) is not. (C) Both together are sufficient, neither alone is. (D) Each statement alone is sufficient. (E) Together, they are still not sufficient. The most common mistake is confusing “I can narrow it down” with “sufficient.” A statement is sufficient only if it produces exactly one answer.
(1) n − 3 is even
(2) 2n + 1 is odd
- (A) Statement (1) alone is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient
- (B) Statement (2) alone is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient
- (C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient
- (D) Each statement alone is sufficient
- (E) Statements (1) and (2) together are not sufficient
Statement (1): If n − 3 is even, then n = even + 3 = even + odd = odd. So n is definitely odd. Sufficient.
Statement (2): 2n is always even for any integer n. Even + 1 = odd. So 2n + 1 is odd regardless of whether n itself is odd or even — it gives zero information about n. Not sufficient.
Key pattern: Always evaluate statements independently first. A statement that is true for every integer is a classic trap — it looks meaningful but tells you nothing about n’s properties.
(1) x + y = 14
(2) x − y = 4
- (A) Statement (1) alone is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient
- (B) Statement (2) alone is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient
- (C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient
- (D) Each statement alone is sufficient
- (E) Statements (1) and (2) together are not sufficient
Statement (1) alone: x + y = 14 has multiple positive integer solutions — (1,13), (2,12), (7,7), (9,5). x could be almost any value. Not sufficient.
Statement (2) alone: x − y = 4 also has multiple solutions — (5,1), (6,2), (7,3). Not sufficient.
Both together: Adding the two equations: 2x = 18, so x = 9. A unique value. Sufficient.
Key pattern: Two linear equations in two unknowns are typically solvable when they are non-redundant. Confirm there is a unique solution, not just that you can solve algebraically.
(1) m > n
(2) n > 0
- (A) Statement (1) alone is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient
- (B) Statement (2) alone is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient
- (C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient
- (D) Each statement alone is sufficient
- (E) Statements (1) and (2) together are not sufficient
Statement (1) alone: m > n. If n = 3, m = 5, then m/n > 1. But if n = −3, m = 1, then m/n < 1. The sign of n changes the answer. Not sufficient.
Statement (2) alone: n > 0, but there is no information about m. Not sufficient.
Both together: n > 0 and m > n means m > n > 0. Both are positive and m is larger, so m/n > 1. Sufficient.
Key pattern: Division questions involving inequalities almost always hinge on the sign of the denominator. Whenever you see a ratio in a DS question, check what is known about the sign of the bottom term first.
(1) The selling price is ₹3,600.
(2) The profit percentage is 20%.
- (A) Statement (1) alone is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient
- (B) Statement (2) alone is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient
- (C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient
- (D) Each statement alone is sufficient
- (E) Statements (1) and (2) together are not sufficient
Statement (1) alone: Selling price is ₹3,600, but without the profit margin, cost price cannot be found. Not sufficient.
Statement (2) alone: Profit is 20%, but without an absolute value, no specific cost price emerges. Not sufficient.
Both together: SP = CP × 1.2, so CP = 3,600 ÷ 1.2 = ₹3,000. A unique value. Sufficient.
Key pattern: Business-math DS questions (profit, discount, markup) usually need both a percentage and an absolute value to produce one specific answer. Either alone leaves the answer underdetermined.
(1) a ≠ b
(2) a > 0 and b > 0
- (A) Statement (1) alone is sufficient, but statement (2) alone is not sufficient
- (B) Statement (2) alone is sufficient, but statement (1) alone is not sufficient
- (C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient
- (D) Each statement alone is sufficient
- (E) Statements (1) and (2) together are not sufficient
Reframe first: a2 + b2 > 2ab is the same as (a − b)2 > 0. A square is never negative, and it equals zero only when a = b. So the real question is: is a ≠ b?
Statement (1): a ≠ b is exactly the condition needed. Sufficient.
Statement (2): a > 0 and b > 0, but if a = b = 2, then a2 + b2 = 8 = 2ab — not strictly greater. a = b is possible here. Not sufficient.
Key pattern: Hard DS questions often hide an algebraic identity. Rephrase the question before touching the statements — recognising (a − b)2 is what makes Statement (1) immediately decisive.
After reading Statement (1), you land in either A/D territory (sufficient) or B/C/E territory (not sufficient). If Statement (1) alone is sufficient, you only need to check whether Statement (2) is also sufficient: yes means D, no means A. If Statement (1) is not sufficient, you never go back to D. This cuts your decision tree in half on every question.
The DS approach is counterintuitive — it takes deliberate practice to stop solving for the answer and start evaluating sufficiency. A structured study plan makes the difference.
Table Analysis Practice Questions
Evaluate each statement as True or False based solely on the table — outside knowledge doesn’t count.
You’re given a sortable data table and must evaluate each statement using only what’s in it. See our GMAT Table Analysis guide for deeper strategy. The key discipline: absolute language like “every,” “none,” or “always” is usually False — find one counterexample and you’re done.
| Product | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | Annual Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpha | 12 | 15 | 14 | 18 | 59 |
| Beta | 20 | 18 | 22 | 19 | 79 |
| Gamma | 8 | 11 | 9 | 13 | 41 |
| Delta | 30 | 25 | 28 | 27 | 110 |
| Epsilon | 5 | 7 | 6 | 8 | 26 |
- S1: Delta had the highest annual total among all five product lines.
- S2: Every product line had higher Q4 sales than Q1 sales.
- S3: The combined annual total of Gamma and Epsilon exceeds the annual total of Alpha.
S1: Annual totals — Delta at 110 is the highest of all five. True.
S2: Beta: Q1 = 20, Q4 = 19 — Q4 is lower. One counterexample is enough to break an “every” statement. False.
S3: Gamma (41) + Epsilon (26) = 67, which exceeds Alpha’s 59. True.
Tactic: For “every” or “all” statements, sort the table by the relevant column and scan for one row that breaks the rule. Stop the moment you find it — there’s no need to check the rest.
| Employee | Department | Q1 Score | Q2 Score | Absences |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Arun | Sales | 4.2 | 4.5 | 2 |
| Bina | Tech | 3.8 | 3.8 | 5 |
| Chetan | Sales | 4.9 | 4.3 | 1 |
| Deepa | HR | 4.0 | 4.2 | 3 |
| Elan | Tech | 3.2 | 4.0 | 4 |
- S1: Chetan had the highest Q1 score among all employees.
- S2: Both Tech department employees showed improvement from Q1 to Q2.
- S3: The Sales department had fewer total absences than the Tech department.
S1: Q1 scores — Chetan’s 4.9 is the highest. True.
S2: Bina: Q1 = 3.8, Q2 = 3.8 — no improvement. “Both” fails on a tie. False.
S3: Sales absences: Arun (2) + Chetan (1) = 3. Tech absences: Bina (5) + Elan (4) = 9. 3 is fewer than 9. True.
| City | GDP ($B) | Population (M) | GDP/Capita ($K) | GDP Growth (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mumbai | 310 | 20.4 | 15.2 | 6.8 |
| Delhi | 293 | 32.9 | 8.9 | 7.2 |
| Bengaluru | 110 | 13.2 | 8.3 | 9.5 |
| Chennai | 78 | 10.9 | 7.2 | 8.1 |
| Kolkata | 150 | 14.9 | 10.1 | 5.3 |
- S1: Mumbai has the highest GDP per capita of all five cities.
- S2: The city with the highest GDP growth rate has a total GDP below $150B.
- S3: If current growth rates continue for one year, Delhi’s GDP will exceed Mumbai’s GDP.
S1: GDP per capita — Mumbai’s $15.2K is the highest. True.
S2: Highest growth is Bengaluru at 9.5%, and Bengaluru’s GDP of $110B is below $150B. True.
S3: Delhi after one year: 293 × 1.072 ≈ $314B. Mumbai: 310 × 1.068 ≈ $331B. Mumbai stays higher. False.
Tactic: Keep S3-style projections approximate. 7.2% of 293 is about 21, giving roughly 314; 6.8% of 310 is about 21, giving roughly 331. The rough numbers are enough — both cities gain a similar absolute amount, but Mumbai starts from a higher base.
| Asset | Initial ($K) | Current ($K) | Return (%) | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Equity A | 50 | 65 | +30 | High |
| Bond B | 80 | 84 | +5 | Low |
| Real Estate C | 120 | 138 | +15 | Medium |
| Gold D | 30 | 27 | −10 | Low |
| Tech ETF E | 60 | 78 | +30 | High |
- S1: The combined current value of High-risk assets exceeds the current value of the Medium-risk asset.
- S2: Bond B generated more absolute dollar profit than Gold D generated absolute dollar loss.
- S3: Real Estate C is the sole asset with the highest absolute dollar return among all assets with a positive return.
S1: High-risk: A ($65K) + E ($78K) = $143K. Medium-risk: C = $138K. $143K is more. True.
S2: Bond B profit = $84K − $80K = $4K. Gold D loss = $30K − $27K = $3K. $4K is more than $3K. True.
S3: Absolute returns — A: $15K, B: $4K, C: $18K, E: $18K. C and E are tied at $18K, so C is not the sole highest. False.
Watch for “sole” and “only”: any statement claiming one item is uniquely the best deserves a tie-check before you mark it True.
| Project | Team Size | Budget ($K) | Spent ($K) | Completion (%) | On Schedule |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alpha | 8 | 200 | 160 | 80 | Yes |
| Beta | 12 | 350 | 280 | 65 | No |
| Gamma | 5 | 150 | 90 | 70 | Yes |
| Delta | 15 | 500 | 200 | 35 | No |
| Epsilon | 6 | 120 | 115 | 90 | Yes |
- S1: The project that has spent the highest percentage of its budget is also the most complete.
- S2: Both projects behind schedule have spent less than 80% of their budget to date.
- S3: Assuming remaining work costs proportionally as much as work done so far, Project Delta will need an additional $371K to complete.
S1: % spent — Alpha 80%, Beta 80%, Gamma 60%, Delta 40%, Epsilon ≈95.8%. Epsilon spends the highest share and is also the most complete at 90%. True.
S2: Beta is behind schedule and has spent exactly 280/350 = 80% — not less than 80%. The statement fails on this precision trap. False.
S3: Delta: 35% complete for $200K spent, so cost per 1% complete ≈ $5.714K. Remaining 65% × $5.714K ≈ $371K. True.
Key pattern: Proportional-cost problems are common in hard Table Analysis questions. Set up a unit rate (cost per % complete) and multiply by the remaining work — it’s a ratio, not a complex calculation.
Graphics Interpretation Practice Questions
Read the drop-down options before the graph — they tell you what kind of calculation is coming.
You see a chart or graph and complete sentences using drop-down menus. For deeper strategy, see our GMAT Graphics Interpretation guide. Precision matters: close options (35% vs. 36%) usually need a clean calculation, not an estimate.
Statement 1: The region with the highest Q1 sales was [Drop-down A]. Options: {North, South, East, West}
Statement 2: Total sales in Q2 were [Drop-down B] higher than Q1. Options: {₹10Cr, ₹20Cr, ₹30Cr, ₹40Cr}
S1: Q1 values — East’s ₹150Cr is the highest. East.
S2: Q1 total: 120+80+150+100 = ₹450Cr. Q2 total: 140+90+130+120 = ₹480Cr. Difference = ₹30Cr.
Tactic: For total-comparison questions, add in pairs that round cleanly — (120+150) and (80+100) — rather than reaching for the calculator on every single number.
Statement 1: Revenue in June was [Drop-down A] % higher than revenue in January. Options: {75%, 100%, 125%, 150%}
Statement 2: The month with the largest single month-over-month revenue increase was [Drop-down B]. Options: {February, April, May, June}
S1: Increase = $18M − $8M = $10M. Percentage increase = 10/8 = 125%.
S2: Month-over-month changes: Feb +$2M, Mar −$1M, Apr +$3M, May +$3M, Jun +$3M. Three months tie at +$3M; April is the first to reach that jump and is the intended answer among the drop-down options.
Tactic: Read the drop-down options before computing. {75%, 100%, 125%, 150%} tells you the answer should land on a clean number — if your calculation doesn’t, recheck your base value.
Statement 1: Apple’s market share is approximately [Drop-down A]% of Samsung’s market share. Options: {27%, 37%, 47%, 57%}
Statement 2: If the total market is 150 million units, the combined unit sales of the top 3 brands is approximately [Drop-down B] million units. Options: {50M, 60M, 70M, 75M}
S1: Apple ÷ Samsung = 7/19 ≈ 0.368 ≈ 37%.
S2: Top 3 brands: 19% + 16% + 15% = 50%. 50% of 150M = 75M units.
Tactic: Pie-chart questions usually test part-to-whole or ratio-of-percentages logic. Identify which one is being asked before touching any numbers — the two setups are completely different.
Statement 1: The year in which absolute EBITDA was highest was [Drop-down A]. Options: {Year 2, Year 3, Year 4, Year 5}
Statement 2: Between Year 2 and Year 3, while revenue increased, EBITDA in absolute terms [Drop-down B]. Options: {increased, decreased, remained unchanged}
| Year | Revenue ($M) | EBITDA Margin (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 100 | 12% |
| Year 2 | 130 | 14% |
| Year 3 | 155 | 11% |
| Year 4 | 170 | 13% |
| Year 5 | 200 | 15% |
S1: Absolute EBITDA = Revenue × Margin. Y1: $12M. Y2: $18.2M. Y3: $17.05M. Y4: $22.1M. Y5: $30M — the highest.
S2: Y2 EBITDA = $18.2M; Y3 EBITDA = $17.05M. Even though revenue rose from $130M to $155M, the margin drop (14% → 11%) pulled absolute EBITDA down. Decreased.
Key insight: When revenue grows but margin drops, the direction of absolute profit isn’t obvious — it depends on which change is larger. This is the most common trap in dual-axis chart questions. Compute both years rather than eyeballing the trend lines.
Difficulty tagging helps, but a targeted plan that focuses your prep hours on the right things is what actually moves the needle.
Multi-Source Reasoning Practice Questions
Distinguish what is explicitly stated from what merely doesn’t contradict the sources.
MSR gives you 2–3 tabbed sources and 2–3 questions per set. The critical discipline is separating “supported by” from “consistent with.” An answer option being plausible is not the same as it being supported by the text.
Source 2 — Sales Log: Monday: 45 coffees, 30 croissants, 12 sandwiches. Tuesday: 52 coffees, 20 croissants, 18 sandwiches.
Question: What was the total revenue from both days combined?
- ₹30,000
- ₹32,450
- ₹34,400
- ₹36,200
Monday: (45×200) + (30×150) + (12×250) = ₹9,000 + ₹4,500 + ₹3,000 = ₹16,500.
Tuesday: (52×200) + (20×150) + (18×250) = ₹10,400 + ₹3,000 + ₹4,500 = ₹17,900.
Combined: ₹16,500 + ₹17,900 = ₹34,400.
Tactic: Map the sources first — Source 1 gives prices, Source 2 gives quantities. Once you know which source supplies what, it’s pure multiplication and addition. On the real exam, use the on-screen calculator for anything with three or more line items.
Source 2 (Production Report): The line runs 10 hours per day. Overtime is available up to 2 additional hours per day. Current backlog: 1,200 units before the new order begins.
Question: Can the company fulfil both the backlog and the client order by end of next week without using any overtime?
- Yes
- No
Available hours (no overtime): 5 days × 10 hrs = 50 hrs, minus 8 hrs maintenance = 42 hours.
Units producible: 42 × 500 = 21,000 units.
Units needed: 1,200 (backlog) + 6,000 (order) = 7,200 units.
21,000 is comfortably more than 7,200, so capacity is sufficient without overtime.
Key trap: The maintenance downtime creates an instinct that there’s a problem. Resist concluding “no” before finishing the arithmetic — the numbers here say otherwise.
Source 2 (Employee Profile — Priya Singh): Role: Senior Analyst. Annual CTC: ₹18,00,000. Working days per year: 240. Unused leave this year: 14 days. Previously carried-forward leave: 3 days.
Q1: How many leave days will Priya carry forward to next year?
Q2: What will Priya’s leave encashment amount be?
- Q1 options: {3, 7, 10, 13}
- Q2 options: {₹22,500, ₹30,000, ₹37,500, ₹52,500}
Q1: The policy caps carry-forward at 10 days. Priya has 14 unused days, so she carries forward exactly 10, and the remaining 4 are encashed.
Q2: Daily rate = ₹18,00,000 ÷ 240 = ₹7,500/day. Encashable days = 14 − 10 = 4. Encashment = 4 × ₹7,500 = ₹30,000.
Key discipline: Priya’s 3 previously carried-forward days are a distractor — the policy explicitly excludes them from encashment. MSR sets frequently include data that’s irrelevant to a specific sub-question, placed there to cost you time.
Source 2 (Company Announcement — EV-Co Ltd): FY2024 revenue ₹4,800 crore, up 45% from FY2023. EV-Co sells exclusively four-wheeler EVs in India. FY2024 unit sales: 28,000 vehicles.
Q1: Was EV-Co’s FY2024 revenue growth faster or slower than overall EV market growth?
Q2: Select all statements directly supported by the sources: A) EV-Co’s customers are ineligible for the FAME-II subsidy. B) EV-Co sold more vehicles than any single two-wheeler manufacturer. C) EV-Co’s average selling price was approximately ₹17.1 lakh. D) Overall EV market growth was driven entirely by two-wheeler sales.
Q1: EV-Co grew 45%; the overall market grew 68%. EV-Co grew more slowly.
Q2 — A: Supported. FAME-II covers two- and three-wheelers only, and EV-Co sells four-wheelers, so its customers are ineligible.
B: Not supported. We know EV-Co’s total units but have no data on any individual two-wheeler manufacturer’s volume.
C: Supported. ₹4,800 crore ÷ 28,000 units ≈ ₹17.14 lakh per vehicle.
D: Not supported. The report says two-wheelers dominate at 60% — “dominated” is not the same as “entirely drove growth.”
The “supported” vs. “consistent” distinction: Option B is plausible and not contradicted, but nothing confirms it. Option D overstates the data. These two failure modes account for most wrong answers in hard MSR sets.
Two-Part Analysis Practice Questions
Both columns must be correct together — there’s no partial credit.
You select one answer for each of two linked columns. TPA questions can be quantitative (two variables satisfying constraints) or verbal (two statements satisfying a logical condition). Read our GMAT Two-Part Analysis guide for strategy on both types. For quantitative TPA, write out your equations before looking at the options table.
Identify the budget for Project A and Project B.
- Options: {$6,000, $8,000, $10,000, $12,000, $14,000} for each column
Let A and B be the two budgets.
Constraint 1: A + B = 20,000
Constraint 2: A = B + 4,000
Substituting: (B + 4,000) + B = 20,000 → 2B = 16,000 → B = 8,000, so A = 12,000.
Tactic: Write both equations before scanning the options table. Solving first and matching afterward is faster than testing every combination — especially since only one option works per column.
Identify V1 and V2.
- Options: {30, 45, 60, 75, 90} km/h for each column
Let V2 = v and V1 = 2v.
Time = distance/speed: 150/2v + 150/v = 5 → 75/v + 150/v = 5 → 225/v = 5 → v = 45.
So V2 = 45 km/h and V1 = 90 km/h.
Verify: 150/90 + 150/45 = 1.67 + 3.33 = 5 hours. Confirmed.
Always verify: For speed-time-distance TPA questions, plug your answers back into the original constraint. It takes twenty seconds and catches arithmetic slips before they cost you the question.
- Options: {2, 3, 4, 5, 6} units for each column
Machine A: 3X + Y = 21. Machine B: X + 2Y = 12.
From Machine A: Y = 21 − 3X. Substituting into Machine B: X + 2(21 − 3X) = 12 → X + 42 − 6X = 12 → −5X = −30 → X = 6, so Y = 3.
Verify: Machine A: 3(6) + 3 = 21. Machine B: 6 + 2(3) = 12. Both check out.
Set up the constraint equations immediately. Resource-allocation TPA questions — machine hours, budget limits — always reduce to a two-equation, two-variable system. Write it out rather than testing options unless you get stuck.
Identify one option as an assumption the argument depends on, and one option as the alternative explanation that most weakens it.
Options — A) Satisfaction was measured with the same methodology before and after launch. B) Delivery times improved by 30% during the same period. C) The app received positive reviews in its first week. D) No other significant changes occurred during the period. E) Over 60% of customers downloaded the app within the first month.
Assumption (D): The argument concludes the app caused the increase. For that causal claim to hold, it must assume no other significant changes happened at the same time. Option D is exactly that gap.
Weakener (B): A 30% improvement in delivery times over the same period is a strong alternative explanation for the satisfaction increase, and it directly undercuts the app-caused-it claim.
Why not A as the assumption? A concerns measurement consistency, which matters but is secondary. The argument’s core weakness is the leap from correlation to causation, and D targets that gap directly.
For verbal TPA: Each column asks a different logical question. Read both column headers before evaluating options — an option can look relevant to both columns while being the best fit for only one.
How to Approach the Full 45-Minute DI Section
Roughly 2 minutes 15 seconds per question, across five different mental modes.
Practising individual question types is necessary but not sufficient. The real challenge is managing five different mental modes across 20 questions in 45 minutes. Once you’ve worked through individual question types, move to full-section simulations — see our GMAT practice tests guide for how to structure timed sessions and what to review after each mock.
The format of each question type is immediately visible, so spend zero seconds identifying it. Spend your first ten seconds deciding whether this is a compute-first question (GI, TPA) or an evaluate-first question (DS, MSR, TA).
The GMAT Focus Edition lets you return to flagged questions. For MSR, bookmark the first question, read all source tabs, then answer every sub-question for that prompt before moving on. Use the same tactic for DS questions that need extra thinking time.
DS questions rarely need the calculator. Table Analysis usually needs only quick comparisons. Graphics Interpretation and quantitative TPA are where the calculator earns its keep.
For TA, GI, and MSR, read the question first, then engage with the source knowing exactly what you’re looking for. Reading the whole table or passage before the question is one of the biggest time leaks in DI.
For Table Analysis statements using “every,” “all,” or “none,” sort by the relevant column and scan for the single exception. The moment you find it, mark False and move on.
In MSR, the most common wrong answer is plausible but not directly supported. Before selecting an answer, ask if you can point to the exact sentence that supports it — if not, it’s only consistent.
What to Do Next
Working through these questions is a solid start. The gap between understanding the format and executing reliably under time pressure is where preparation makes or breaks your DI score. If you want to close that gap efficiently, online GMAT coaching with mentor feedback on your specific error patterns is the fastest route to a consistent score. When you’re ready to build a structured timeline around your DI prep, our 3-month GMAT study plan shows how to allocate time across all three sections.
Twenty-two worked questions won’t replace a full study plan, but they will show you exactly which of the five DI types needs the most attention before you build one. Use the difficulty filters to find your weak spot, then bring that pattern to a mentor who can build a plan around it.
Get a free profile evaluation and a personalised GMAT study plan from an expert who knows exactly where Indian candidates lose marks in Data Insights.
Frequently Asked Questions
Devmitra Sen is Head of Academics at Crackverbal and has trained over 4,000 students. Her scorers tell the story: GMAT 745, 725, 715, 705 alongside turnarounds like 575→715 and 375→675. She has produced multiple Q90 scores, including a perfect 100th percentile on GMAT Quant — a benchmark very few coaches can claim consistently. On Data Insights, her superpower is changing how students see, observe, and comprehend data: breaking it down, reasoning through it, and zeroing in on exactly what the question asks. The results follow: multiple 90+ percentile DI scores, including a 1st to 99th percentile turnaround in under two and a half months. She carries a quiet interest in the history of mathematical thought — particularly ideas rooted in India long before they were formalised elsewhere — a perspective that gives her an unusually grounded sense of why the subject matters.
TL;DR GMAT Multi-Source Reasoning (MSR) questions give you 2–3 tabs of data and ask you to cross-reference across all of...
TL;DR GMAT Graphics Interpretation (GI) questions appear in the Data Insights section and ask you to read a graph or...
TL;DR ISB’s Class of 2026 averaged 665 on the GMAT Focus Edition. There is no official cutoff. A score of...
Your 705+ score starts with
one expert call.
30-minute strategy session. We'll audit your prep, find your gaps, and build a roadmap to your target score.