Treat the contradiction as something to explain, not something to eliminate. Two exhibits can measure different segments, periods, or mechanisms and both be correct.

First check definitions, units, time frames, and populations. Then ask what hypothesis could reconcile the two pieces of evidence instead of choosing the chart you prefer.

For example, total sales can rise while same-store sales fall if the company is opening many new locations. The exhibits conflict only until you separate the drivers.

State the tension clearly and identify what additional information would resolve it. That demonstrates more insight than forcing both charts into one convenient story. A concise, evidence-based explanation will usually sound stronger than a long defensive one. The interviewer should be able to see what you would actually do next, not just hear a general principle. For more detail, see the case interview data-analysis guide.

Conflicting exhibits can be the interesting part of the case rather than a problem.