I recently analyzed 100 GMAT score reports (from East Asian test-takers) to see how Quant (Q), Verbal (V), and Data Insights (DI) percentiles impact the total GMAT score. I ran a regression analysis to understand the relationship between these components and the overall score. Here’s a breakdown of my findings:
(Photo in Attachment)
GPT's interpretation:
Model Accuracy (R-squared)
The R-squared value of the regression model came out to 0.968, meaning the model explains 96.8% of the variation in total scores. In other words, Q, V, and DI have a huge impact on the total score, and the model is highly accurate.
Regression Coefficients
Intercept (constant): -17.9639 While this indicates that the total score would be around -17.96 when Q, V, and DI are zero, it doesn’t have much real-world meaning, since percentiles can't actually be negative.
Quant (Q): 0.5404 For every 1-point increase in the Quant percentile, the total score increases by about 0.54 points. This suggests that Quant has the largest impact on the total score among the three sections.
Verbal (V): 0.3159 A 1-point increase in the Verbal percentile leads to a 0.32-point increase in the total score.
Data Insights (DI): 0.4589 Every 1-point increase in the DI percentile raises the total score by roughly 0.46 points.
Statistical Significance (P-values)
The P-values for all three predictors (Q, V, and DI) are extremely close to 0, which means that these factors are statistically significant. Their influence on the total GMAT score is not due to random chance.
--
In short, Quant clearly has the most substantial effect on the total score, but all three components matter.
Anyone else geek out on GMAT stats like this? It seems like investing effort into Quant and DI yields the highest return for improving GMAT total score.
Attachments

i-did-a-regression-analysis-on-100-gmat-score-reports-heres-v0-zo6rmkd0q3wd1.png.webp [ 98.85 KiB | Viewed 940 times ]