It’s not holier than though, it’s a simple factual rebuttal.
The purpose of the chart is to highlight change. showing a 0-100% range for data that shifts within a couple of percentage points makes the change difficult to see
The second chart starts at zero because the lower bounds of the data are much closer to zero. It still tops out at 70% to highlight the change.
It doesn’t matter if it’s a line or bars, the data would look nearly flat with a 0-100% range — and for what reason?
It is you who has assigned a special value in your mind to 0 and 100. There is nothing constraining real data to those limits. Growth can be negative or above 100. Those values are no more magical than 12 or 27 or 1444.829.
> the data would look nearly flat with a 0-100% range — and for what reason?
To show honestly that the change is barely noticeable.
An even more useful chart would have a y-axis from -50% to 50%. Then readers could see clearly that revenues were still growing, just not quite as fast as last period and well above any risk of contraction.
>To show honestly that the change is barely noticeable.
Any claim that the chart is misleading would have to show that it is disproportionate relative to the impact of these "barely noticable" changes on discounted future cash flows, which is the rational basis for stock valuation. These changes, if sustained, are potentially very significant.
>Then readers could see clearly that revenues were still growing
But the target audience already knows that because it's a simple headline number. The chart zooms in on a particular aspect that matters a great deal to that audience - for good reason.
The purpose of the chart is to highlight change. showing a 0-100% range for data that shifts within a couple of percentage points makes the change difficult to see
The second chart starts at zero because the lower bounds of the data are much closer to zero. It still tops out at 70% to highlight the change.
It doesn’t matter if it’s a line or bars, the data would look nearly flat with a 0-100% range — and for what reason?
It is you who has assigned a special value in your mind to 0 and 100. There is nothing constraining real data to those limits. Growth can be negative or above 100. Those values are no more magical than 12 or 27 or 1444.829.