BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

Leslie and Kerri

Expert replies
by bharatv » Wed May 27, 2009 4:01 am
Over the last two years, who made more money investing in stock market, leslie or kerri?

(1) Leslie made an average return of 20% and Kerri made an average return of 5%.

(2) Kerri started with two times as much money as Leslie.

Can someone explain the steps?

OA - E
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by aj5105 » Wed May 27, 2009 4:24 am
I am getting the answer as [spoiler](C)[/spoiler]

:shock:
Join the discussion

by tdadic84 » Wed May 27, 2009 6:32 am
im also getting C...can someone explain please..
Join the discussion

by Jose Ferreira » Wed May 27, 2009 7:09 am
One of the most important tips I can offer on Data Sufficiency is to pay attention when the GMAT gives you a bit of information without calling much attention to it.

In this case, I am honing in on the fact that statement 1 talks about the "average" returns each person received.

To establish a lack of sufficiency, because the answer is E, we need to create a situation in which Leslie makes more and a situation in which Kerri makes more.

Scenario 1 - Leslie makes more
Leslie starts with $100 and makes 20% both years.
100(1.2)(1.2) = 144
Kerri starts with $200 and makes %5 both years.
200(1.05)(1.05) = 220.50

If we can come up with a scenario in which Leslie makes less that $20.50, then the answer must be E.

Scenario 2 - Kerri makes more
Leslie starts with $100. She loses 50% the first year and gains 90% the second year. We can do this, because the average of (-50) and (90) is 20.
100(.5)(1.9)= 95

In this scenario, she did average +20% returns, but she actually lost $5 over the two years.

The answer is E
Jose Ferreira
Founder and CEO, Knewton, Inc.
https://www.knewton.com/gmat
Join the discussion

by aj5105 » Wed May 27, 2009 10:42 am
Jose,

I assumed values for L and K (K double than L). I calculated 20% for L and 5% for K. I doubled the values to get the amount for 2 years. For all values of L and K, I got L gaining more than K.

Sticking to the approach I have followed, how can I get (E) as the answer?
Join the discussion