Thanks to Dick Kusleika and Andy Pope for offering solutions to my pivot table problem: how to have a column that shows the difference between Max and Min aggregations (or other ‘custom’ aggregation).

Dick’s solution is to have an additional column in the source data: effectively calculating Max, Min and MaxMinDiff before aggregation in the pivot table (so the Max and Min are not done in the pivot table).

I have actually added three columns, to break the formula down: the Max and Min columns are just intermediates. The Max and Min values are *within Month*: since the records are sorted by Month, this can be seen easily.

Here’s the pivot table:

In the pivot table, the Max and Min columns are normal aggregations of the Sales column in the data: they are *not *derived from the Max and Min columns in the data.

However, the MaxMinDiff column in the pivot table *is *derived from the Diff column in the data. Since all the values underlying a MaxMinDiff cell have the same value (e.g. Data H2:H6 underlies Pivot Table D3), we can use any of the non-summing aggregation functions: Max, Min, even Average. I changed the lable to MaxMinDiff, because “Max of Diff” looks weird.

Now the formulas in the additional data columns. The Max and Min formulas are single-cell array formulas:

{=MAX([Sales] * ([Month] = SalesTable[[#This Row],[Month]]))}

{=MIN(IF([Month] = SalesTable[[#This Row],[Month]],[Sales],””))}

The MAX formula is multiplying the Sales column by an array of Booleans, where the latter come from testing the Month column against this row’s Month. I do like the table-range addressing, although I don’t see why a formula within SalesTable needs to refer to SalesTable. The resulting array contains Sales figures for a specific month, and zeroes for the other months; this is then MAXed.

The MIN formula is slightly trickier, because we can not leave the false-case zeroes, as these would of course be the minimum value. However, MIN of a number and an empty value is the number, so “” is substituted for false/zero.

The Diff column formula is then just a simple difference:

=SalesTable[[#This Row],[Max]]-SalesTable[[#This Row],[Min]]

(Again, I don’t see why the syntax requires the reference to SalesTable).

This all works fine, provided that Month is the only visible dimension in our pivot table. This is because the data Max and Min values are within Month, as is obvious from the formulas. However, we could equally well want to see MaxMinDiff for values within Region or within Sales Rep. This would necessitate further columns, or changing the formulas to test a different dimension (e.g. Region).

Andy Pope suggested a VBA solution, handling the *Worksheet_PivotTableUpdate* event:

Private Sub Worksheet_PivotTableUpdate(ByVal Target As PivotTable) With Target.DataBodyRange With .Columns(.Columns.Count) .Offset(-1, 1).Resize(1, 1) = "MaxMinDiff" .Offset(, 1).FormulaR1C1 = "=RC[-2]-RC[-1]" End With End With End Sub

This certainly inserts a column of formulas, but it is next to, rather than part of the pivot table. Consequently, it does not adapt to changes in the pivot table layout. Also, it requires the Max and Min columns to be in the pivot table (I guess you could live with that).

On a completely different tack, a *PivotCache *can be based on a *Recordset *(typically sourced by a SELECT query on some data). I wonder if it’s possible to manipulate such a Recordset to add columns…

Moment you base a pivot on a external data source we can have Calculated columns in the Query(Ms Query) and use more functions like IIF etc.

However aggregations are limited to the same 11 options that you have for the subtotal function