Short answer: a treemap shows composition with many parts — and a hierarchy — as nested rectangles sized by value, so a whole portfolio fits in one picture and the big contributors are the biggest tiles. In a brewery it’s the chart for “show me the entire SKU range / all regions and accounts / total ingredient spend at once,” where a pie would choke and a bar chart would scroll forever. Its cost: area is read less precisely than length, so it’s a big-picture tool, not a precise-ranking one.
Part of The Brewer’s Chart Field Guide. When a pie has too many slices and a bar chart too many bars, the treemap is the answer.
When to reach for it
Reach for a treemap when composition has many parts, optionally nested in a hierarchy, and you want the shape of the whole with approximate proportions. It trades precise ranking (bars do that) for the ability to show everything at once and reveal a hierarchy by nesting.
Use case 1 — The SKU portfolio at a glance
Every product sized by volume or revenue in one frame: the core brands dominate, the long tail of seasonals and one-offs is still visible. It makes portfolio concentration — and tail bloat — obvious, the starting point of any rationalisation conversation.
Use case 2 — Sales by region, then account
Nest accounts inside regions: big region rectangles subdivided into account tiles. You see regional weight and, within it, account concentration — two levels of sales intelligence in one picture.
Use case 3 — Ingredient or cost spend
Total procurement spend nested by category (malt, hops, packaging) then item. The fattest tiles are where your money goes and where negotiation moves the most — a visual companion to the cost build-up.
Where this breaks
Area beats length for “lots at once” but loses on precision — similar tiles are hard to rank; label major tiles with values. Tiny tiles vanish — the smallest SKUs become unreadable slivers; group a “other / tail” tile. No good for trends — a treemap is a snapshot; for change over time use a line or stacked area.
The bottom line
The treemap shows a whole portfolio — many parts, optional hierarchy — as area-sized tiles, perfect for “show me everything at once” when a pie chokes and a bar chart scrolls. Use it for the SKU range, nested sales, and spend; label the big tiles, group the tail, and don’t ask it for precise ranking or trends. Next, the chart for change over time: the line chart.
Frequently asked questions
What is a treemap and when should a brewery use one? A treemap shows composition as nested rectangles whose area is proportional to value, so a whole portfolio fits in one space and the big contributors are literally the biggest tiles. Breweries use it for a SKU portfolio (many products at once), sales broken down by region then account, or ingredient spend by category then item. It handles many categories and a hierarchy where a pie or long bar chart would fail.
Treemap or bar chart? Use a bar chart when you have a manageable number of categories and precise ranking matters — people read bar length more accurately than rectangle area. Use a treemap when there are too many categories for bars, when a hierarchy matters (group within group), or when you want to show the whole portfolio’s shape at once and approximate proportions are enough.
What is the weakness of a treemap? Area is read less precisely than length, so fine differences between similar-sized tiles are hard to judge, and very small tiles become unreadable slivers. Treemaps are great for the big picture and the big contributors, weaker for exact comparison of mid-sized items. Label the major tiles with values to compensate.