Deal of The Day! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

SAP C_IBP_2502 Exam - Topic 1 Question 10 Discussion

You need to define a new logic for a key figure to drive values from the PERPRODCUSTREGION level to the PERPRODCUST level. Which of the following configuration options are possible for this process? Note: There are 2 correct answers to this question
B) Splitting the values from aggregated to detailed level using multiplication by the proportions and D) Splitting the values from aggregated to detailed level, based on a stored split-factor key figure
A) Splitting the values from detailed to aggregated level by using a copy operator
C) Splitting the values form aggregated to detailed level, based on the time profile attribute

SAP C_IBP_2502 Exam - Topic 1 Question 10 Discussion

Actual exam question for SAP's C_IBP_2502 exam
Question #: 10
Topic #: 1
[All C_IBP_2502 Questions]

You need to define a new logic for a key figure to drive values from the PERPRODCUSTREGION level to the PERPRODCUST level. Which of the following configuration options are possible for this process? Note: There are 2 correct answers to this question

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: B, D

by Bernadine at Jul 11, 2025, 01:15 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium C_IBP_2502 Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Man
5 months ago
C seems a bit tricky, not sure about that one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tyra
5 months ago
Wait, can you really use multiplication for this? Sounds off.
upvoted 0 times
...
Hayley
5 months ago
I think D makes sense too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Shakira
5 months ago
A is definitely a valid option!
upvoted 0 times
...
Mindy
5 months ago
I have a vague memory of time profile attributes being mentioned, so maybe option C is a possibility, but I’m not confident about it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Helaine
5 months ago
I think option B sounds familiar, but I can't recall if we specifically covered splitting from aggregated to detailed levels using multiplication.
upvoted 0 times
...
Arleen
6 months ago
I'm not entirely sure, but I feel like option D might be valid since we talked about using split-factor key figures in a similar practice question.
upvoted 0 times
...
Floyd
6 months ago
I remember we discussed using a copy operator for splitting values from detailed to aggregated levels, so I think option A could be correct.
upvoted 0 times
...
In
6 months ago
B is not the way to go, just saying!
upvoted 0 times
...
Nilsa
6 months ago
Hmm, this is a tricky one. I'm not entirely sure about the difference between the "splitting" options. I think I'll make my best guess and then double-check my work before submitting the exam.
upvoted 0 times
...
Silvana
7 months ago
Alright, let me break this down step-by-step. We need to go from the PERPRODCUSTREGION level to the PERPRODCUST level, so that rules out option A. Options B and D both mention splitting from aggregated to detailed, which sounds more like what we need. I think I'll go with those two.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kenneth
7 months ago
I'm a bit confused by the wording of this question. Can we really split values from a detailed level to an aggregated level? That doesn't seem right to me. I'll need to re-read the options more carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gary
7 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. The key is to focus on the level of detail - we need to split the values from the aggregated PERPRODCUSTREGION level down to the more detailed PERPRODCUST level. I'm pretty confident that options A and B are the correct answers here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lillian
7 months ago
Hmm, this looks like a tricky one. I'll need to think through the options carefully to make sure I get the right answer.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anissa
7 months ago
I'm pretty confident I know the right answer here. The key is to use the multiplication by proportions and the stored split-factor key figure options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tracey
8 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. The key is to focus on the differences between splitting from detailed to aggregated level versus aggregated to detailed level.
upvoted 0 times
...
Alline
8 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit confused by the wording here. I'll need to re-read the question a few times to make sure I understand what's being asked.
upvoted 0 times
...
Helaine
8 months ago
This looks like a tricky question. I'll need to think through the different configuration options carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Troy
10 months ago
I believe option B could also work, splitting values using multiplication by proportions.
upvoted 0 times
...
Marsha
10 months ago
Haha, splitting values from detailed to aggregated level? That's like trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube! B and D are definitely the way to go.
upvoted 0 times
Rachael
10 months ago
User 1: Haha, that's a funny analogy!
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Meaghan
10 months ago
I agree with Elza, using a copy operator and a stored split-factor key figure makes sense.
upvoted 0 times
...
Elza
11 months ago
I think option A and D are possible for this process.
upvoted 0 times
...
Craig
11 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about C. Splitting based on time profile feels a bit too specific for this use case. I'd go with B or D.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ahmed
11 months ago
I'm torn between B and D. Gotta love those stored split-factor key figures, but the time profile attribute in C is also pretty neat.
upvoted 0 times
Estrella
10 months ago
User2: Yeah, that does sound like a solid option. But don't count out C with the time profile attribute.
upvoted 0 times
...
Mel
10 months ago
User1: I think D is the way to go, using a stored split-factor key figure.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Trinidad
11 months ago
Option B seems like the way to go. Splitting from aggregated to detailed level using proportions makes the most sense to me.
upvoted 0 times
Tyisha
10 months ago
I'm not sure about the other options, but splitting values based on time profile attribute could work too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Glen
10 months ago
I think using a copy operator to split values is also a valid configuration option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vi
10 months ago
I agree, using proportions to split values seems like the most logical option.
upvoted 0 times
...
...

Save Cancel