Only used for labelling the chart. The order of the rows is what matters.
Sales, sign-ups, traffic, cost — whatever you are trying to predict.
Your first time series tool. Look at what a series is actually made of, extend it with a rule you can say out loud, then find out whether that rule beats doing nothing at all. No parameters to guess, no Python to load, nothing to install.
A forecast is not a magic box. It is a rule for extending a line, and you can say every rule on this page in one plain sentence. This tool has three steps, in this order.
The one idea to take away: a forecasting method has to beat "same as last period" before it is worth anything. A surprising number of expensive, complicated forecasts do not, and the only way to find out is to test them on data they have never seen.
Four series, each one teaching a different answer to "which method should I use". Start with the first — it is the one where the cleverest method loses.
A CSV with one column of dates or period labels and one column of numbers, in time order, with no gaps.
Drag & drop a CSV (.csv, .tsv, .txt)
First row = column headers. One row per period, oldest first.
Only used for labelling the chart. The order of the rows is what matters.
Sales, sign-ups, traffic, cost — whatever you are trying to predict.
How many periods before the pattern repeats: 12 for monthly data with a yearly cycle, 7 for daily data with a weekly one, 4 for quarterly.
Added means the December bump is the same number of units every year. Multiplied means it is the same percentage, so the bump grows as the business does.
The series with its wobble and its cycle smoothed away.
The same shape every cycle, above and below the trend.
Should look structureless. Big spikes here are usually events, not noise.
Pick a rule. Each one is a single sentence — if you cannot say it out loud, do not use it.
Every method looks accurate on the data it was fitted to. The only honest test is to hide the last few periods, forecast them, and compare against what actually happened.
These are cut from the end, never chosen at random — a method that saw next month while predicting this one is not being tested, it is being told.
Watch out: every change you make (a method, a slider, the cycle length) is re-scored on these same hidden periods. Once you pick settings by watching this table, the hidden periods are helping to choose the model, so a score you tuned your way to is optimistic. Check it at a different number of hidden periods before you believe it.
| Method | Typical miss (MAE) | Typical miss (%) | vs. "repeat last period" |
|---|---|---|---|
| Load data to score the methods. | |||
MAE is the average size of the miss, ignoring whether it was too high or too low. The percentage column is left blank when any hidden period sat at or near zero, because dividing by it would produce a meaningless number.