What Is a SWOT Analysis?
A SWOT analysis is a strategic planning framework that evaluates an organization’s internal Strengths and Weaknesses alongside external Opportunities and Threats. Developed in the 1960s by Albert Humphrey at Stanford University, SWOT provides executives with a structured method for competitive assessment and strategic decision-making across industries.
Organizations ranging from Fortune 500 companies to nonprofits use SWOT analyses to identify competitive advantages, anticipate market disruptions, and allocate resources effectively. The framework gained widespread adoption during the 1970s and remains fundamental to business strategy curricula at Harvard Business School, INSEAD, and Wharton. According to research from McKinsey & Company, 73% of enterprise executives incorporate SWOT analysis into annual strategy reviews, making it one of the most utilized strategic planning tools globally.
- Internal Focus: Strengths and Weaknesses examine capabilities, resources, brand reputation, and organizational culture under direct company control
- External Focus: Opportunities and Threats assess market trends, competitive landscape, regulatory changes, and macroeconomic factors beyond organizational control
- Actionable Output: SWOT analysis produces specific strategic recommendations rather than abstract observations
- Versatility: The framework applies to product launches, market entry decisions, competitive repositioning, and crisis management scenarios
- Stakeholder Alignment: SWOT sessions facilitate cross-functional collaboration between marketing, operations, finance, and product teams
- Data-Driven Foundation: Rigorous SWOT analyses incorporate market research, financial metrics, customer feedback, and competitor intelligence
How SWOT Analysis Works
SWOT analysis functions as a structured diagnostic tool that maps an organization’s competitive position by examining four distinct dimensions. The process begins with internal assessment before expanding to external market analysis, creating a comprehensive strategic snapshot. Companies typically conduct SWOT sessions during annual strategic planning cycles or when responding to market disruptions.
- Define Organizational Scope: Identify the specific business unit, product line, or market segment under analysis—whether a company-wide review, regional market assessment, or individual product evaluation
- Conduct Internal Audit: Document core competencies, proprietary technologies, brand equity, financial reserves, supply chain efficiency, talent capabilities, and operational infrastructure
- Identify Internal Constraints: Assess skill gaps, outdated technology platforms, limited financial resources, weak distribution networks, poor organizational culture, or geographic limitations
- Scan Market Opportunities: Research emerging market segments, technological trends, regulatory openings, geographic expansion possibilities, partnership opportunities, and shifting consumer preferences
- Assess External Threats: Monitor competitor actions, disruptive technologies, regulatory threats, economic downturns, supply chain vulnerabilities, and changing customer demands
- Cross-Reference Dynamics: Analyze intersections between strengths-opportunities (how to leverage advantages), strengths-threats (defensive strategies), weaknesses-opportunities (improvement priorities), and weaknesses-threats (critical risks)
- Develop Strategic Initiatives: Translate SWOT findings into specific action plans with assigned owners, timelines, and measurable outcomes
- Monitor and Iterate: Establish quarterly review cycles to track SWOT changes, assess strategy effectiveness, and adjust competitive positioning
18 SWOT Analysis Examples: Key Metrics and Data
| Organization | Industry | Market Cap/Revenue | Key Strength | Critical Weakness | Primary Opportunity | Main Threat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apple | Technology | $3.52 trillion market cap (2024) | Premium brand loyalty, vertical integration | High product pricing limits market penetration | AI services expansion, emerging markets | China market dependency, regulatory scrutiny |
| Amazon | E-commerce/Cloud | $2.19 trillion market cap (2024) | AWS cloud dominance (32% market share), logistics network | Profitability pressure from retail operations | International marketplace expansion, advertising growth | Regulatory antitrust actions, competitive AWS challengers |
| Tesla | Automotive/Energy | $1.29 trillion market cap (2024) | EV technology leadership, manufacturing efficiency | Supply chain concentration, production scaling challenges | Energy storage market, autonomous vehicles, gigafactory expansion | Traditional automakers EV transition, commodity price volatility |
| Walmart | Retail | $648 billion revenue (2024) | Scale advantage, omnichannel integration, supply chain excellence | Labor cost pressures, rural market limitations | E-commerce acceleration (16% growth), advertising network monetization | Amazon marketplace competition, gig economy labor shortages |
| McDonald’s | Food Service | $25.49 billion revenue (2024) | Global brand recognition, franchising model, operational efficiency | Health perception challenges, menu customization complexity | Digital ordering technology, Asian market expansion, ghost kitchens | Labor cost inflation (10-15% annually), alternative food trends |
| Nike | Athletic/Apparel | $46.71 billion revenue (2024) | Brand power, direct-to-consumer channels (DTC 39% of sales), athlete partnerships | Manufacturing concentration in Vietnam/Indonesia, inventory management | Digital personalization, emerging sports markets, sustainability positioning | Chinese competitor expansion, retail consolidation, counterfeiting |
| Samsung | Electronics | $244 billion revenue (2024) | Semiconductor dominance, R&D investment ($22.7 billion annually), diversification | Brand fragmentation across product lines, geopolitical exposure | AI chip demand, advanced display technology (OLED), EV battery market | Taiwan chip supply concentration risk, US-China trade tensions |
| Netflix | Streaming/Entertainment | $297 billion market cap (2024) | Content library depth, subscriber base (278 million 2024), technology platform | Password-sharing clampdown subscriber alienation, content cost escalation | Ad-tier revenue expansion, gaming integration, international original content | Competing streaming services (Disney+, Amazon Prime), content licensing costs |
| Costco | Warehouse Retail | $272 billion revenue (2024) | Member loyalty (98% renewal rate), operational efficiency, buying power | Limited geographic footprint (870 warehouses), real estate constraints | E-commerce expansion, fresh food market share, international growth (Mexico, Japan) | Competition from Amazon Prime, Walmart, changing member preferences |
| Disney | Entertainment/Media | $223 billion revenue (2024) | Iconic intellectual property (Star Wars, Marvel), theme parks, streaming ecosystem | Streaming service profitability challenges, content pipeline disruptions (strikes 2023) | Disney+ subscriber monetization, streaming content syndication, metaverse experiences | Cord-cutting acceleration, regulatory content restrictions, competing streamers |
| Microsoft | Software/Cloud | $3.47 trillion market cap (2024) | Enterprise software dominance, Azure cloud (31% market share), AI integration (OpenAI partnership) | Legacy product dependency, enterprise customer concentration | Copilot AI monetization, Cybersecurity expansion, enterprise AI tools | Cloud competition (AWS, Google Cloud), antitrust scrutiny, talent competition |
| Google/Alphabet | Technology/Advertising | $2.07 trillion market cap (2024) | Search dominance (92% market share), data capabilities, YouTube platform (2.7 billion users) | Regulatory antitrust risks, ad market dependence (80% revenue) | AI services monetization, healthcare technology, Cloud infrastructure expansion | Privacy regulations (GDPR, DMA), AI-powered search competition, cookie deprecation |
| Toyota | Automotive | $310 billion market cap (2024) | Hybrid/EV technology leadership, manufacturing reliability (TPS), supplier network | EV transition slower than competitors, traditional engine overproduction | Battery technology expansion, autonomous vehicle development, emerging market penetration | Chinese EV manufacturers (BYD), regulatory emissions standards, supply chain disruption |
| Meta/Facebook | Social Media/Advertising | $1.36 trillion market cap (2024) | Social network scale (3.19 billion users), advertising targeting, metaverse R&D | Content moderation challenges, Apple iOS privacy impact (36% ad revenue pressure) | AI advertising optimization, metaverse commercialization, reels monetization (Instagram/TikTok competition) | Regulatory scrutiny (EU DMA fines €797 million 2023), TikTok competition, younger user decline |
| Uber | Mobility/Gig Economy | $95.4 billion market cap (2024) | Global rideshare dominance (69% US market share), network effects, multimodal platform | Profitability challenges despite $5.2 billion revenue growth, regulatory uncertainty | Autonomous vehicles, freight expansion (22% growth), international markets (India, Southeast Asia) | Regulatory driver classification threats (California Prop 22), intense competition (Lyft), antitrust scrutiny |
| JPMorgan Chase | Financial Services | $637 billion market cap (2024) | Investment banking dominance, asset management ($4.6 trillion AUM), credit quality, technology infrastructure | Regulatory compliance costs ($1.4 billion annually), geographic concentration, interest rate sensitivity | Wealth management growth, digital banking expansion, emerging market opportunities | Fintech disruption, regulatory pressure on lending practices, macroeconomic recession risk |
| LVMH Moët Hennessy | Luxury Goods | $198.7 billion revenue (2024) | Luxury brand portfolio (75+ brands), supply chain control, Asian market presence | High price point market sensitivity, geographic expansion costs, counterfeiting | E-commerce/digital luxury growth, Chinese consumer recovery, sustainability premium positioning | Economic slowdown luxury demand, Chinese competition, sustainability regulations |
| Shell Energy | Energy/Oil & Gas | $95.8 billion revenue (2024) | Integrated energy portfolio, renewable energy investments, production scale | Fossil fuel transition pressure, environmental liabilities, stranded asset risk | Renewable energy expansion, hydrogen economy transition, carbon capture technology | Fossil fuel demand decline, ESG divestment pressure, geopolitical supply disruptions |
Leading global organizations demonstrate how SWOT analysis reveals competitive positioning across industries. Technology sector companies like Apple and Microsoft leverage vertical integration and ecosystem lock-in as core strengths, while confronting regulatory threats and competitive commoditization. Retail giants Walmart and Costco utilize supply chain efficiency and scale advantages to compete against digitally-native Amazon, yet face labor cost pressures and changing consumer preferences.
Consumer-facing brands including Nike and Disney maintain powerful brand equity generating premium pricing power, yet must navigate shifting market demographics and digital disruption. Financial institutions like JPMorgan Chase command market dominance through diversified services and technological infrastructure, while managing regulatory compliance burden and fintech competition. Energy sector players including Shell face existential transitions from fossil fuels to renewables, requiring massive capital reallocation and portfolio management.
Analysis of these 18 organizations reveals consistent patterns: technology-driven advantages prove durable when protected by patents and network effects, whereas operational efficiency advantages face commoditization pressure from global competition. Companies commanding premium brand equity face vulnerability to category disruption and demographic shift, while incumbent scale players must defend against distributed, digitally-native competitors. SWOT frameworks enable executives to translate these comparative observations into targeted strategic initiatives.
McDonald’s SWOT Analysis in Detail
McDonald’s operates 41,860 restaurants across 106 countries, generating $25.49 billion in annual revenue (2024) with net income of $6.67 billion. The franchisor model delivers 95% revenue from franchisees, creating capital-light growth and geographic scalability. McDonald’s strength originates from global brand recognition—estimated $69.2 billion brand value by Interbrand—enabling premium pricing and customer loyalty despite commodity input costs.
McDonald’s weakness centers on health perception challenges and labor cost pressures increasing 12-15% annually across developed markets. The company’s menu customization complexity and supply chain coordination across 41,000 restaurants creates operational brittleness during disruptions. Market opportunities include digital ordering technology adoption (47% of US orders digital in 2024), Asian market expansion (particularly India with 423 locations), and ghost kitchen models capturing delivery demand without restaurant overhead.
Threats include labor unionization campaigns (UK strikes 2023, US organizing efforts escalating), alternative food trend adoption reducing beef consumption, and local regulatory challenges affecting labor practices and menu offerings. McDonald’s SWOT analysis reveals strategic focus areas: accelerate technology integration, diversify menu toward plant-based proteins, optimize franchisee profitability through operational support, and proactively address labor relations before regulatory intervention.
Nike SWOT Analysis in Detail
Nike generates $46.71 billion in annual revenue (2024) with 28% gross margins and commanding 10.2% global athletic footwear market share. The company’s strength derives from unparalleled athlete partnerships (securing endorsements from top 500 athletes annually), direct-to-consumer channels representing 39% of sales, and product innovation capabilities protected by 3,000+ patents. Brand power enables premium pricing with average athletic shoe prices 23% above competitors.
Nike’s primary weakness stems from geographic concentration in manufacturing—Vietnam and Indonesia produce 41% of unit volume, creating supply chain vulnerability to geopolitical disruption. Inventory management challenges resulted in $3.8 billion excess inventory writedown (2023), demonstrating forecasting limitations during demand shifts. Labor cost pressures in contract factories and US manufacturing onshoring increase production expenses 8-12% annually.
Market opportunities include digital personalization through mobile apps (SNKRS app 180 million downloads), expansion into women’s athletic category (currently 31% of revenue versus 45% addressable market), and emerging market penetration in India, Southeast Asia, and Africa where athletic footwear adoption remains underdeveloped. Primary threats include Chinese competitor Anta Sports’ rapid international expansion and Adidas competitive intensity. Nike’s SWOT directs strategic investment toward DTC channel optimization, supply chain diversification, and women’s market expansion.
Samsung SWOT Analysis in Detail
Samsung generates $244 billion in annual revenue (2024) across diverse business segments: semiconductors ($81.2 billion), consumer electronics ($52.4 billion), and display panels ($18.9 billion). Samsung’s foundational strength centers on semiconductor leadership—commanding 18.2% global DRAM market share and advanced manufacturing capabilities through massive R&D investment of $22.7 billion annually (9.3% of revenue). Vertical integration across memory chips, processors, displays, and devices creates ecosystem advantages competitors cannot replicate.
Samsung’s weakness emerges from geographic concentration risk—South Korea operations carry geopolitical exposure amid US-China tensions and North Korea threats, while Taiwan’s TSMC dependency for advanced chip production creates supply chain brittleness. Product portfolio fragmentation across 40+ smartphone models and brand complexity dilute marketing effectiveness compared to focused competitors like Apple. Environmental liabilities from semiconductor manufacturing require substantial capital investment.
Opportunities include AI chip demand explosion projected to reach 1.2 billion units annually by 2028, advanced display technology dominance (OLED displays command 67% premium pricing), and electric vehicle battery market expansion where Samsung aims to reach $27 billion annual revenue by 2030. Threats include TSMC’s process technology advantage, Chinese competitors (Huawei, SMIC) narrowing technology gaps, and US export restrictions affecting China sales (historically 19% of semiconductor revenue). Samsung’s SWOT analysis emphasizes accelerated AI chip capability development, advanced packaging technology investment, and geographic diversification away from Korea.
Costco SWOT Analysis in Detail
Costco operates 870 warehouses globally, generating $272 billion in annual revenue (2024) with net income of $8.44 billion and exceptional member loyalty—98% renewal rate among Gold Star members versus 96% in North America. Costco’s core strength derives from operational efficiency delivering lowest delivered cost among warehouse competitors, supply chain excellence reducing inventory holding periods to 34 days, and treasure-hunt merchandising maintaining visit frequency of 3.5 times monthly per membership.
Primary weakness centers on geographic limitations—expansion requires massive warehouse footprints (160,000 square feet) and customer density thresholds limiting addressable markets, particularly rural areas and smaller communities. Real estate constraints in saturated North American markets restrict growth to 2-3% annually in mature regions. International expansion involves lengthy profitability timelines (Mexico locations required 6 years to breakeven), limiting capital returns and geographic diversification.
Market opportunities include e-commerce acceleration—currently 11.2% of sales but expanding rapidly—fresh food market share expansion in adjacent demographics, and international growth particularly Mexico (49 locations with strong expansion potential) and Japan (28 locations). Threats include Amazon Prime competitive pressure on delivery expectations (35-minute Whole Foods delivery), Walmart’s price leadership and omnichannel integration, and consumer preference shifts toward convenience shopping. Costco’s SWOT directs investment toward digital capability development, international market discipline, and adjacent category expansion within warehouse format.
Walmart SWOT Analysis in Detail
Walmart operates 11,487 stores across 28 countries, generating $648 billion in annual revenue (2024) with net income of $17.1 billion and commanding 6.9% of global retail market share. Walmart’s foundational strength derives from unmatched scale creating supply chain cost advantages—supplier relationships secured through 450+ billion annual purchase volume enable negotiating power competitors cannot access. Omnichannel integration (e-commerce 12% of revenue, accelerating 12% annually) combines physical stores with digital capabilities reaching 140 million digital customers monthly.
Walmart’s primary weakness centers on labor cost pressures increasing 14% annually due to worker organization campaigns and market competition for talent (Target and Amazon both competing aggressively). Store format concentration in rural and secondary markets limits penetration in high-density urban areas where Amazon and local retailers compete effectively. Technology infrastructure modernization requires substantial capital (5% of revenue annually) to compete against Amazon’s AI capabilities.
Market opportunities include advertising network monetization (Walmart Connect estimated $2.8 billion revenue in 2024, growing 28% annually) capturing supplier direct-to-consumer spending, healthcare expansion through telehealth services and clinic network, and emerging market penetration in Latin America and Southeast Asia. Primary threats include Amazon’s competitive intensity, discount retailer expansion (TJ Maxx growing 6% annually), and Chinese e-commerce competitors like Alibaba and Pinduoduo capturing price-conscious consumers. Walmart’s SWOT strategy emphasizes advertising platform expansion, healthcare services integration, and international market optimization.
Uber SWOT Analysis in Detail
Uber generates $39.7 billion in annual revenue (2024) with geographic presence in 900+ cities across 70+ countries and dominant market position—commanding 69% of US rideshare market share with 122 million monthly active users. Uber’s core strength derives from network effects where driver and passenger density create liquidity advantages competitors cannot overcome, multi-service platform integration (ride, delivery, freight), and technology infrastructure enabling real-time matching and pricing optimization. First-mover advantage established unbreakable market position despite late entrants.
Primary weakness centers on profitability challenges—despite revenue growth, Uber remains sensitive to driver costs representing 68% of ride revenue. Regulatory uncertainty regarding driver classification creates liability exposure; California’s Proposition 22 required $200 million annual contribution to driver benefits, establishing precedent for mandatory benefit costs globally. Geographic variability in regulatory treatment creates operational complexity and legal exposure in over 70 countries with inconsistent labor classifications.
Market opportunities include autonomous vehicle technology commercialization beginning 2026 (Uber ATG partnership with Waymo), freight expansion (22% annual growth outpacing ride growth), and international market penetration where Uber command weaker competitive positions than ride-dominant developed markets. Threats include Lyft’s aggressive pricing and customer loyalty programs, Chinese competitors Didi Chuxing and new entrants in underpenetrated markets, and sustained regulatory pressure toward driver employee classification. Uber’s SWOT directs capital toward autonomous vehicle development, freight service expansion, and geographic market-specific regulatory adaptation strategies.
Advantages and Disadvantages of SWOT Analysis
Advantages
- Structured Decision-Making: SWOT creates consistent analytical framework enabling comparison across time periods and competitive scenarios, reducing cognitive bias in strategy development and improving executive alignment on priority decisions
- Cross-Functional Collaboration: SWOT sessions unite sales, operations, product, and finance teams in shared reality assessment, breaking organizational silos and surfacing ground-level market insights executives might otherwise miss
- Actionable Strategic Output: Unlike abstract market analysis, SWOT directly translates findings into strategic initiatives with clear ownership and resource allocation, increasing implementation probability
- Cost-Effective Analysis: SWOT requires minimal financial investment (internal team time and basic research), delivering high insight return compared to expensive consulting engagements or market research projects
- Threat Early Detection: Systematic threat assessment forces proactive identification of disruption risks—regulatory changes, technology shifts, competitive moves—enabling defensive positioning before crises emerge
Disadvantages
- Oversimplification Risk: SWOT’s four-quadrant structure forces complex competitive dynamics into simplistic categories, potentially obscuring interdependencies, secondary effects, and strategic nuances requiring deeper analysis
- Subjective Assessment Bias: SWOT analysis depends on participant perception and internal politics; strong executives dominate discussions, resource-constrained departments understate capabilities, and organizational groupthink influences findings
- Static Snapshot Limitations: SWOT captures point-in-time competitive position but provides limited insight into dynamic market evolution, competitive response intensity, or strategic option sequencing over multi-year timeframes
- Implementation Gap: SWOT analysis frequently remains strategic document without translating into operational execution—teams complete analysis but fail to establish accountability, resource commitment, or progress tracking mechanisms
- Incomplete Competitive Intelligence: SWOT framework omits stakeholder analysis, value chain positioning, customer switching cost assessment, and substitute product threats—critical factors determining strategic viability
Key Takeaways
- SWOT analysis evaluates organizational competitive position across four dimensions—internal strengths/weaknesses and external opportunities/threats—enabling data-driven strategic decision-making across industries and company sizes
- Rigorous SWOT frameworks require grounding in specific market data (market share, revenue metrics, competitor intelligence) rather than generalized observations, increasing strategic credibility and implementation likelihood
- Cross-functional SWOT sessions unite leadership perspectives on market reality, breaking organizational silos and surfacing ground-level insights that improve strategic alignment across departments
- Technology and consumer goods companies leverage SWOT to identify brand and innovation advantages, while retail and energy sectors use SWOT to assess regulatory threats and business model disruption risks
- Successful SWOT implementation requires establishing accountability structures translating analysis findings into specific initiatives with assigned owners, budgets, and quarterly progress measurement
- SWOT analysis works optimally when conducted iteratively (quarterly review cycles) rather than annual snapshots, enabling dynamic competitive positioning adjustments as markets shift and strategic options evolve
- Combine SWOT analysis with complementary frameworks—Porter’s Five Forces for industry structure, value chain analysis for cost positioning, scenario planning for uncertainty management—to develop comprehensive strategic understanding
Frequently Asked Questions
How frequently should organizations conduct SWOT analysis?
Leading organizations conduct formal SWOT analysis annually during strategic planning cycles but maintain quarterly review sessions monitoring significant changes in competitive positioning, market conditions, or organizational capabilities. Technology and consumer goods sectors experiencing rapid disruption benefit from semi-annual SWOT updates, while stable industries like utilities or insurance can conduct thorough analysis every 18-24 months supplemented with annual threat/opportunity scanning.
What is the difference between SWOT analysis and PEST analysis?
SWOT analysis examines internal capabilities (strengths/weaknesses) and external environment (opportunities/threats), providing organizational perspective. PEST analysis (Political, Economic, Social, Technological) exclusively focuses on macroeconomic environmental factors affecting industries broadly, providing external-only assessment. Organizations typically use PEST for market entry decisions and SWOT for organizational strategy, sometimes combining both frameworks for comprehensive strategic planning.
How can organizations prevent SWOT analysis bias and subjectivity?
Grounding SWOT analysis in quantitative data—market share metrics, revenue trends, competitor financial performance, customer satisfaction scores, patent filings, employee retention rates—reduces subjective assessment and organizational politics influence. Bringing external perspectives through advisory board input, customer interviews, and competitive intelligence firms validates internal assumptions. Structuring SWOT sessions with facilitators trained in group dynamics prevents dominant executives from overwhelming discussion and ensures balanced perspective representation across hierarchical levels.
What are the best practices for translating SWOT analysis into strategic action?
Effective SWOT implementation requires establishing specific strategic initiatives with clear ownership, budget allocation, and measurable success metrics tied to each quadrant finding. Creating dedicated SWOT working groups with cross-functional representation ensures initiatives receive ongoing attention rather than becoming ignored strategic documents. Establishing quarterly progress reviews and executive scorecards tracking SWOT-derived initiative completion rates embeds accountability and maintains strategic momentum through operational cycles.
How should organizations handle contradictions between SWOT findings and existing strategy?
SWOT analysis frequently surfaces misalignment between organizational strategy and competitive reality—when SWOT identifies critical weaknesses in core business areas or overlooked threats, this signals urgent strategy reassessment requirements. Leading companies view SWOT contradictions as valuable signals enabling course correction before markets punish strategic missteps. The appropriate response involves updating strategic priorities, rebalancing resource allocation, and potentially reorganizing capabilities to address SWOT-identified gaps rather than defending existing strategic commitments.
Can SWOT analysis work for nonprofit organizations and government agencies?
SWOT analysis adapts effectively to nonprofit and government contexts by translating competitive language into mission-relevant terminology—”opportunities” become funding sources and partnership possibilities, while “threats” encompass budget constraints and regulatory restrictions. Nonprofits like American Red Cross and United Way use SWOT analysis to identify program expansion possibilities and competitive positioning against other charities serving similar populations. Government agencies use SWOT for service delivery improvement and regulatory strategic planning, though implementation faces additional constraints from political cycles and bureaucratic approval processes.
What metrics and data sources should SWOT analysis incorporate?
Robust SWOT analysis integrates financial metrics (revenue, profitability, return on capital), competitive intelligence (market share, competitor financial performance, strategy tracking), customer data (satisfaction scores, net promoter scores, purchase patterns), operational metrics (efficiency ratios, quality measures, capacity utilization), technology assessments (patent filings, technology spending, capability maturity), and talent metrics (employee retention, skills assessment, compensation benchmarking). Secondary sources include industry analyst reports from Gartner and McKinsey, regulatory filings, customer feedback, employee surveys, and supplier relationships providing market visibility unavailable through internal data alone.
