Aggregations are often used as "the typical farm" to compare a farm's own results against. Check these four things first. How aggregations are calculated is explained in Aggregated Data.
An aggregation is published however few Cycles it rests on, sometimes only a handful from one study. Look at its number of Cycles and its quality score. If it is based on too few Cycles, say so alongside the comparison, or use the World aggregation instead. Debugging Aggregated Data shows which studies it uses.
A country's crop aggregation mixes organic and conventional farms in proportion to their area, so it mostly describes conventional farming (see Crop Aggregation). Separate organic aggregations are not published: to benchmark an organic farm, select the organic Cycles from the aggregation's underlying data, as described in Debugging Aggregated Data.
Record an Organic Practice, and an irrigation Practice where relevant, on your own Cycles so they are grouped the same way.
A data release is calculated once and never changes. A Cycle recalculated today uses newer models and emission factors, so part of any difference may come from the method, not the farm. For example, since August 2026 nitrate leached to groundwater no longer counts towards ReCiPe 2016 acidification, but aggregations in earlier releases still include it.
Compare only results whose method has not changed (see Reproducing a Result), wait for the next release, or compare emissions rather than impact indicators.
Aggregations are published for each country and for the World. Use the country aggregation when it is based on enough data. Otherwise the World aggregation is a fairer reference, as long as you say it is not specific to the farm's country. Always state the country, period and release you compared against, and remember that a single Cycle's results have no margin of error — see Uncertainty of Cycle Results.