Why does this filter not work?
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Why does the below filter, not actually filter anything out?
[fund_status] != "MODEL-DEAD"
or [fund_status] != "DELETE"
or [fund_status] != "PROSPECTIVE"
- Labels:
- Expression
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Guessing you should use AND (not OR)
You could also use something like this
[fund_status] NOT IN ("MODEL-DEAD", "DELETE", "PROSPECTIVE")
Chris
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
@craigja Use the AND operator instead OR
[fund_status] != "MODEL-DEAD"
AND [fund_status] != "DELETE"
AND [fund_status] != "PROSPECTIVE"
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Figured it out - or rather I asked ChatGPT and it figured it out!
In Alteryx, you are using an "or" condition in your filter, which may not provide the desired results when filtering out rows based on multiple unequal conditions. In your current filter, if any of the conditions are true, the row will be included in the filtered data set, which may not exclude all of the undesired records. To fix the filter and exclude rows containing "MODEL-DEAD", "DELETE", or "PROSPECTIVE", you should use an "and" condition instead:
```
[fund_status] != "MODEL-DEAD"
and [fund_status] != "DELETE"
and [fund_status] != "PROSPECTIVE"
```
This way, you ensure that only rows where all three conditions are true (none of these fund statuses are matched) will be included in the filtered data.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Notify Moderator
Thanks for the answers though! All makes sense now
