The symmetric bell-shaped distribution; about 68% of values lie within 1 SD of the mean and about 95% within 2 SD.
Example
Common mistakes
Assuming revenue or order value is normal. Money metrics are usually right-skewed; the bell curve will understate how often big orders happen.
Thinking every test needs normal raw data. For means of large samples the central limit theorem does that job; normality of the raw data matters mainly for small samples.
Using the 68–95–99.7 rule to flag outliers in skewed data. The rule only holds for bell-shaped data.
Reading "normal" as "healthy" or "typical". It is the name of a shape, not a verdict on your metric.
Trusting a formal normality test on a huge sample. With 100,000 rows it rejects normality for harmless wiggles; look at the histogram and ask whether the deviation changes your decision.
Learn it in the course
Sample vs population and the normal distribution · Sample vs population: why we study samples to learn about all users, why the bell-shaped normal distribution shows up everywhere, and how the central limit theorem ties them together.
95% confidence intervals · Building a 95% confidence interval from its formula and margin of error, so you report a range of plausible values instead of one number.
The normal distribution is the classic bell curve: symmetric, with a single peak in the middle and thin tails that fade out on both sides. Two numbers describe it completely: the mean μ sets where the peak sits, and the standard deviation σ sets how wide the bell is. The mean, median and mode all coincide at the centre. The curve's formula is
f(x)=σ2π1e−2σ2(x−μ)2
but in practice you almost never need it. What you need is its consequence, the 68–95–99.7 rule: about 68% of values fall within μ±σ, about 95% within μ±2σ and about 99.7% within μ±3σ. (The exact 95% boundary is 1.96σ, the number behind most confidence intervals.) Convert any value to a z-score and one standard table works for every normal variable.
Where does it appear? In quantities shaped by many small, independent nudges, such as the fill weight of a food bag or measurement noise. For PMs the more important place is one step removed: thanks to the central limit theorem, sample means and conversion rates from reasonably large samples are close to normal even when the raw data are not. That is why z-tests, t-tests and confidence intervals lean on the bell curve.
What is usually not normal: revenue per customer, order value, session length, anything with a floor at zero and a long right tail. Don't assume the shape; check it with a histogram.
CatChow's factory fills standard 2 kg bags. Fill weights are close to normal with mean μ=2,000 g and SD σ=10 g.
By the 68–95–99.7 rule:
Range
Weights
Share of bags
μ±1σ
1,990–2,010 g
about 68%
μ±2σ
1,980–2,020 g
about 95%
μ±3σ
1,970–2,030 g
about 99.7%
The label promises at least 1,980 g. How many bags in a batch of 5,000 fall short? 1,980 g is exactly 2σ below the mean. About 95% of bags are within ±2σ, so the remaining 5% split equally between the two tails: roughly 2.5% are too light. The exact table value for z=−2 is 2.28%, so 0.0228×5,000≈114 bags.
Now suppose the filling machine gets sloppier and σ grows to 15 g while the mean stays at 2,000 g. The same 1,980 g is now z=(1,980−2,000)/15≈−1.33, and about 9.1% of bags fall below it: roughly 456 of 5,000. The average didn't move at all, yet underweight bags quadrupled. With normal data, the spread matters as much as the mean.