using MATCH, and LOOKUP

[Guest]

I want to look up the largest number in coloum K and return the value in
Coloum A that is in the same row that the largest number in Coloum K is.

 

[RagDyeR]

Try this:

=INDEX(A:A,MATCH(MAX(K:K),K:K,0))
--

HTH,

RD
=====================================================
Please keep all correspondence within the Group, so all may benefit!
=====================================================


I want to look up the largest number in coloum K and return the value in
Coloum A that is in the same row that the largest number in Coloum K is.

 

[Guest]

One way, in say L1:
=INDEX(A:A,MATCH(MAX(K:K),K:K,0))

 

[Manfred]

RD,

Can you recommend a matching formula that would search for the same stock
symbols in two columns with substantially varying numbers of rows between
them, and list only these symbols in a separate 3rd column?

Any response appreciated.

 

[Guest]

I want to look up the largest number in coloum K and return the value in
Coloum A that is in the same row that the largest number in Coloum K is.

Thanks.. that worked great.

 

[Ragdyer]

I don't follow exactly what you're looking for.

What do you mean by:
<<<"with substantially varying numbers of rows between them">>>

Does that mean that the 2 symbols are *not* in the same row in both columns?

What are you looking to do with these *same* symbols?
Do you want to count them ... or what?

 

[T. Valko]

http://tinyurl.com/2mtl7b

Biff

I don't follow exactly what you're looking for.

What do you mean by:
<<<"with substantially varying numbers of rows between them">>>

Does that mean that the 2 symbols are *not* in the same row in both
columns?

What are you looking to do with these *same* symbols?
Do you want to count them ... or what?

 

[Ragdyer]

That appears to clear up the "mud", and it also appears you gave him what he
asked for!

Never too sure when OPs repost simply because they don't know how to keep
track and find their own posts after time buries them deeper and deeper
within the groups.

Your link here should solve even that supposition.

 

[Manfred]

Actually, I hadn't received a response yet and you seemed to know what you
were doing, given your response to what seems like a similar problem. My
apologies for the confusion, though.

 

[RagDyeR]

Did you try the link that Biff posted in *this* thread?

It proves that you did get a response to your original post ... and that
suggested formula appears to fulfill your request.