Free Topic-Wise General Studies MCQs
Master Percentages and Successive Changes for the CSAT. High-yield practice MCQs to help you decode data and solve quantitative problems efficiently.
Your Total Marks
Syncing Benchmark...
Want to redo this specific test later?
REF ID (Save this!):
Explanation: The equivalent single discount is found by multiplying the remaining fractions: (1-0.20)×(1-0.10) = 0.80×0.90 = 0.72. The customer pays 72% of marked price, so discount = 100% - 72% = 28%.
Explanation: For successive discounts, multiply the remaining fractions: 0.9×0.8×0.7 = 0.504. Selling price is 50.4% of marked price, so equivalent single discount = 100% - 50.4% = 49.6%.
Explanation: Using successive change formula: Net change = 25 - 20 - (25×20)/100 = 5 - 5 = 0%. Alternatively, multiplier = 1.25 × 0.80 = 1.00, confirming no net change. A 25% increase followed by a 20% decrease on the new base exactly cancels out.
Explanation: For successive increases: Net % = a + b + (a×b)/100 = 10 + 20 + (10×20)/100 = 32%. Alternatively, multiplier = 1.10 × 1.20 = 1.32, confirming a 32% total increase. The second 20% is calculated on the increased base, not the original.
Explanation: Multiplier = 1.20 × 1.25 = 1.50. Therefore, net increase = 50%. Using the formula for successive increases: 20 + 25 + (20×25)/100 = 45 + 5 = 50%. Each percentage is applied to the new base after the previous change.
Explanation: For successive decreases: Multiplier = (1-0.20)×(1-0.30) = 0.8×0.7 = 0.56. Final value is 56% of original, so total decrease = 100% - 56% = 44%. Using formula: -20 - 30 + (20×30)/100 = -50 + 6 = -44%, i.e., 44% decrease.
Explanation: Multiplier = 1.50 × 0.50 = 0.75. The final value is 75% of original, so net decrease = 25%. The 50% decrease is applied to a larger base (after the 50% increase), so it removes more than the increase added. Formula: 50 - 50 - (50×50)/100 = -25%.
Explanation: Let the second discount be d%. Then (1-0.40)×(1-d/100) = (1-0.60). So 0.60×(1-d/100) = 0.40. Therefore 1-d/100 = 0.40/0.60 = 2/3 ≈ 0.6667. Thus d = 100 - 66.67 = 33.33%. The second discount must be approximately 33.33%.
Explanation: Expenditure = Price × Consumption. To keep expenditure constant: (1.25P) × C_new = P × C_old, giving C_new = C_old/1.25 = 0.80×C_old. Reduction = 20%. Formula: Percentage decrease in consumption = (Percentage increase in price)/(100 + Percentage increase) × 100 = 25/125 × 100 = 20%.
Explanation: Expenditure = Price × Consumption. To keep expenditure constant: (0.80P) × C_new = P × C_old, giving C_new = C_old/0.80 = 1.25×C_old. Increase = 25%. Formula: Percentage increase in consumption = (Percentage decrease in price)/(100 - Percentage decrease) × 100 = 20/80 × 100 = 25%.
Explanation: Expenditure multiplier = 1.50 × 0.80 = 1.20. Therefore, expenditure increases by 20%. The 50% price increase dominates because the 20% consumption decrease is applied to the already higher price. Formula: Net change = 50 - 20 - (50×20)/100 = 30 - 10 = 20%.
Explanation: Expenditure multiplier = 0.80 × 1.25 = 1.00. The expenditure remains unchanged. A 20% price decrease exactly offsets a 25% consumption increase because 0.80 × 1.25 = 1. Formula: Net change = -20 + 25 + (-20×25)/100 = 5 - 5 = 0%.
Explanation: Expenditure multiplier = 1.10 × 0.90 = 0.99. Therefore, expenditure decreases by 1%. Equal percentage increases and decreases do not cancel out because they operate on different bases. Formula: Net change = 10 - 10 - (10×10)/100 = -1%.
Explanation: Expenditure = Price × Consumption. New Expenditure = 1.20 × Old Expenditure. New Price = 1.25 × Old Price. So 1.20 = 1.25 × (Consumption ratio), giving Consumption ratio = 1.20/1.25 = 0.96. Therefore, consumption decreases by 4%.
Explanation: Expenditure = Price × Consumption. 1.08 = 1.20 × (Consumption ratio), so Consumption ratio = 1.08/1.20 = 0.90. Therefore, consumption decreases by 10%. The price increase outpaces the expenditure increase, forcing a reduction in quantity consumed.
Explanation: Expenditure = Price × Consumption. 0.81 = 0.90 × (Consumption ratio), so Consumption ratio = 0.81/0.90 = 0.90. Therefore, consumption decreases by 10%. Even though the price fell, the expenditure fell more sharply, indicating a significant reduction in consumption.
Explanation: Multiplier = 1.10 × 1.20 × 0.90 = 1.188. Net percentage change = 18.8%. The population first grows to 11,000, then to 13,200, and finally falls to 11,880. The final 10% decrease is applied to the larger base of 13,200, removing 1,320 people, which is more than the initial 1,000 increase.
Explanation: Multiplier = (1.20)³ = 1.20 × 1.20 × 1.20 = 1.728. Net increase = 72.8%. Year 1: 20% increase. Year 2: 20% of the new higher base. Year 3: 20% of the even higher base. Compounding causes the total increase to exceed 60%.
Explanation: Multiplier = 0.90 × 0.90 × 1.20 = 0.972. Since 0.972 < 1, there is a net decrease. Net change = (0.972 - 1) × 100 = -2.8%, i.e., a 2.8% decrease. The two 10% decreases compound to a 19% decrease, and the 20% increase is not enough to fully recover the losses.
Explanation: Let the annual growth rate be r%. Then 8000×(1+r/100)² = 10125. So (1+r/100)² = 10125/8000 = 1.265625. Taking square root: 1+r/100 = √1.265625 = 1.125. Therefore r = 12.5%. The simple average of 26.56% over 2 years (13.28%) is incorrect because population growth compounds annually.
Explanation: Let total registered voters = T. Votes cast = 0.90T. Valid votes = 0.80 × 0.90T = 0.72T. Winner got 0.55 × 0.72T = 0.396T. Loser got 0.45 × 0.72T = 0.324T. Margin = 0.396T - 0.324T = 0.072T = 1620. Therefore T = 1620/0.072 = 22,500.
Explanation: Let total registered = T. Votes cast = 0.90T. Valid votes = 0.75 × 0.90T = 0.675T. Winner = 0.60 × 0.675T = 0.405T. Loser = 0.40 × 0.675T = 0.270T. Margin = 0.405T - 0.270T = 0.135T = 2700. Therefore T = 2700/0.135 = 20,000.
Explanation: Let total votes = T. A has 0.45T, B has 0.55T. After shift: A has 0.45T + 0.10T = 0.55T, B has 0.55T - 0.10T = 0.45T. New margin = 0.55T - 0.45T = 0.10T = 2000. Therefore T = 2000/0.10 = 20,000.
Explanation: Let total votes = T. A gets 0.40T, B gets 0.60T. If A had 5000 more: A would have 0.40T + 5000. B still wins by 2000: 0.60T - (0.40T + 5000) = 2000. So 0.20T - 5000 = 2000, giving 0.20T = 7000, and T = 35,000.
Explanation: Let CP = 100. Marked price = 100 + 20% of 100 = 120. After 10% discount, SP = 120 - 12 = 108. Profit = 108 - 100 = 8. Profit percentage = 8/100 × 100 = 8%. The discount is applied on the marked price (120), not the cost price.
Explanation: Let CP = 100. Marked price = 140. After 20% discount, SP = 140 × 0.80 = 112. Profit = 112 - 100 = 12. Profit percentage = 12%. The 20% discount is on the marked price (140), giving a reduction of 28, not 20.
Explanation: Let original CP = x. Then SP = 1.25x. New CP = x + 100, New SP = 1.25x + 100. New profit = (1.25x + 100) - (x + 100) = 0.25x. New profit% = 0.25x/(x+100) = 20%. So 0.25x = 0.20x + 20, giving 0.05x = 20, x = 400. Wait, let me recalculate: 0.25x = 0.20(x+100) = 0.20x + 20, so 0.05x = 20, x = 400. Hmm, the answer should be 400, not 250. Let me fix this. Actually, I need to correct this question. The correct answer is 400, not 250. Let me update the options and answer. Options should be: ["300", "400", "500", "250"] with answer "400". Explanation: Let original CP = x. SP = 1.25x. New CP = x+100, New SP = 1.25x+100. New profit = 0.25x. New profit% = 0.25x/(x+100) = 20%. So 0.25x = 0.20x + 20, giving 0.05x = 20, x = 400.
Explanation: Let CP = x. Original SP = 0.90x. New SP = 0.90x + 90. New profit = (0.90x + 90) - x = 90 - 0.10x. This equals 5% of CP: 90 - 0.10x = 0.05x. So 90 = 0.15x, giving x = 600. The Rs. 90 covers the original 10% loss plus the new 5% profit, totaling 15% of CP.
Explanation: Let SP of each article = 100. CP of first = 100/1.20 = 83.33. CP of second = 100/0.80 = 125. Total CP = 208.33. Total SP = 200. Loss = 8.33. Loss percentage = 8.33/208.33 × 100 = 4%. There is always a net loss when equal percentages of profit and loss are applied on different cost prices. Formula: Net loss = (20²/100)% = 4%.
Explanation: Let original CP = 100. SP = 120 (20% profit). New CP = 80 (20% decrease). New profit = 120 - 80 = 40. New profit% = 40/80 × 100 = 50%. The same selling price now yields a much higher percentage because the cost base has shrunk.
Explanation: Let A's CP = x. B's CP = 1.20x. C's CP = 1.25 × 1.20x = 1.50x = 450. Therefore x = 450/1.50 = 300. Working backwards: C pays 450, so B's CP = 450/1.25 = 360. A's CP = 360/1.20 = 300.
Explanation: Let CP of 1000g = 100. Marked price = 130. After 10% discount, SP = 117. But he gives only 900g, whose CP = 90. Profit = 117 - 90 = 27. Profit% = 27/90 × 100 = 30%. The false weight further inflates profit because the cost is calculated on 900g while revenue is collected for '1kg'.
Explanation: Let maximum marks = M. Passing marks = 0.30M + 30 = 0.40M - 20. So 0.10M = 50, giving M = 500. The difference between 40% and 30% is 10% of maximum marks, which equals the 50 marks gap (30 marks to reach passing + 20 marks above passing).
Explanation: A = 1.25 × B, so B = 600/1.25 = 480. B = 1.20 × C, so C = 480/1.20 = 400. Alternatively, A = 1.25 × 1.20 × C = 1.50C = 600, giving C = 400. Common errors include finding B's marks (480) and stopping, or incorrectly applying reverse percentages.
Explanation: Using set theory: Failed at least one = Failed A + Failed B - Failed both = 35 + 45 - 20 = 60%. Therefore, passed both = 100% - 60% = 40%. The 20% who failed both are counted in both the 35% and 45%, so they must be subtracted once to avoid double counting.
Explanation: Passing marks = 120 + 40 = 160. This equals 40% of maximum marks. So 0.40M = 160, giving M = 400. The student scored 120, which is 40 marks below the passing threshold of 160.
Explanation: Maximum marks = 50/0.25 = 200. Passing marks = 40% of 200 = 80. Student scored 90. Margin = 90 - 80 = 10 marks. The student passed by 10 marks.
Explanation: B = 400 + 25% of 400 = 400 + 100 = 500. A = 500 + 20% of 500 = 500 + 100 = 600. Alternatively, A = 1.20 × 1.25 × 400 = 1.50 × 400 = 600. The successive increases compound: 25% on 400 gives 500, then 20% on 500 gives 600.
Explanation: Area = Length × Breadth. New area = 1.20L × 0.80B = 0.96LB. Change = (0.96 - 1) × 100 = -4%, i.e., 4% decrease. Formula: Net change = 20 - 20 - (20×20)/100 = -4%.
Explanation: Area = πr². New area = π(1.10r)² = 1.21πr². Increase = 21%. Since area depends on the square of the radius, a 10% radius increase causes a (1.10² - 1) × 100 = 21% area increase. Formula: 2×10 + (10²/100) = 20 + 1 = 21%.
Explanation: Volume = s³. New volume = (1.20s)³ = 1.728s³. Increase = 72.8%. Since volume depends on the cube of the side, a 20% side increase causes a (1.20³ - 1) × 100 = 72.8% volume increase. Formula: 3×20 + 3×(20²/100) + (20³/100²) = 60 + 12 + 0.8 = 72.8%.
Explanation: Volume = L × B × H. New volume = 1.50L × 1.20B × 1.10H = 1.98LBH. Increase = 98%. Formula for three successive increases: a+b+c + (ab+bc+ca)/100 + abc/10000 = 50+20+10 + (1000+200+500)/100 + 10000/10000 = 80 + 17 + 1 = 98%.
Explanation: Let original price = x. Then x + 0.20x = 360, so 1.20x = 360, giving x = 300. Common error: decreasing the new price by 20% (giving 288) is wrong because 20% of 360 is larger than 20% of the original price.
Explanation: Let original price = x. Then x - 0.25x = 450, so 0.75x = 450, giving x = 600. Common error: increasing 450 by 25% (562.5) is wrong because 25% of 450 is not the same as 25% of the original higher price.
Explanation: Let original number = x. After 20% increase: 1.20x. After 20% decrease: 1.20x × 0.80 = 0.96x = 480. So x = 480/0.96 = 500. The 20% decrease is applied to the larger base (1.20x), so it removes more than the 20% increase added.
Explanation: Let original number = x. After 10% decrease: 0.90x. After 10% increase: 0.90x × 1.10 = 0.99x = 990. So x = 990/0.99 = 1000. The 10% increase is applied to the smaller base (0.90x), so it adds less than the 10% decrease removed.
Explanation: Let original price = x. After first 10% increase: 1.10x. After second 10% increase: 1.10x × 1.10 = 1.21x = 605. So x = 605/1.21 = 500. Reversing only one 10% increase (giving 550) is incorrect because both increases compound.
Explanation: Let original price = x. After 20% increase: 1.20x. After 25% decrease: 1.20x × 0.75 = 0.90x = 540. So x = 540/0.90 = 600. The net effect is a 10% decrease (0.90x), so dividing by 0.90 recovers the original.
Explanation: Original alcohol = 20% of 30 = 6 litres. After adding x litres water, total mixture = 30 + x litres. For 15% alcohol: 6/(30+x) = 0.15. So 6 = 4.5 + 0.15x, giving 0.15x = 1.5, and x = 10 litres. The amount of alcohol remains constant while the total volume increases.
Explanation: Using alligation: The difference between 40% and 30% is 10, and between 50% and 40% is 10. The ratio is 10:10 = 1:1. Alternatively, let quantities be x and y. Then 0.30x + 0.50y = 0.40(x+y), giving 0.10y = 0.10x, so x:y = 1:1.
Explanation: Original milk = 2/3 × 60 = 40 litres, water = 20 litres. In 15 litres removed, milk = 2/3 × 15 = 10 litres, water = 5 litres. Remaining milk = 30 litres. After adding 15 litres water, total = 60 litres, milk = 30 litres. Milk percentage = 30/60 × 100 = 50%.
Explanation: Original sugar = 20% of 50 = 10 litres. This remains constant. For 25% concentration: 10/V = 0.25, so V = 40 litres. Water evaporated = 50 - 40 = 10 litres. The sugar amount does not change during evaporation.
Explanation: A = 0.80 × B, so B = 9600/0.80 = 12000. B = 1.20 × C, so C = 12000/1.20 = 10000. Alternatively, A = 0.80 × 1.20 × C = 0.96C = 9600, giving C = 10000. The two 20% changes do not cancel because they operate on different bases.
Explanation: A = 1.25 × B, and B = 0.80 × C. So A = 1.25 × 0.80 × C = 1.00C = C. Therefore A's income equals C's income, 0% difference. The 25% increase on a reduced base (80% of C) exactly compensates for the 20% decrease.
Explanation: A = 1.20B. C = 0.75 × A = 0.75 × 1.20B = 0.90B. Therefore C = 90% of B, meaning C is 10% less than B. The 25% decrease is applied to the inflated base (1.20B), so it removes more than a simple 25% of B would.
Explanation: Let B's income = 100. Then A's income = 125. A's savings = 20% of 125 = 25. B's savings = 30% of 100 = 30. Difference = 5. Percentage by which B's savings exceed A's = 5/25 × 100 = 20%. Despite A's higher income, B's higher savings rate results in greater absolute savings.
Explanation: Tax on first 2,50,000 = 0. Tax on next 2,50,000 = 10% of 2,50,000 = 25,000. Remaining income = 8,00,000 - 5,00,000 = 3,00,000. Tax on remaining = 20% of 3,00,000 = 60,000. Total tax = 25,000 + 60,000 = 85,000. The tax is calculated on each slab separately, not on the total income.
Explanation: Let old average after 14 innings = x. Total runs = 14x. After 15th innings: (14x + 120)/15 = x + 5. So 14x + 120 = 15x + 75, giving x = 45. New average = 45 + 5 = 50. The 120 runs in the 15th innings not only maintained the old average (45 × 15 = 675, old total would be 45 × 14 = 630, so 120 is 45 more than needed), but added 5 runs to each of the 15 innings.
Explanation: Maximum marks = (120 + 40)/0.40 = 160/0.40 = 400. Passing marks = 160. Second student gets 200. Margin = 200 - 160 = 40. Percentage by which he passes = 40/160 × 100 = 25%. The percentage is calculated relative to the passing threshold, not the maximum marks.
Explanation: Let males = M, females = 50000 - M. New males = 1.10M, new females = 1.20(50000-M). Total new = 1.12 × 50000 = 56000. So 1.10M + 60000 - 1.20M = 56000. Thus -0.10M = -4000, giving M = 40000. The weighted average of 10% and 20% is 12%, confirming males and females are in ratio 8:2 (alligation: 20-12=8, 12-10=2, so ratio males:females = 8:2 = 4:1. Males = 4/5 × 50000 = 40000).