Does anyone really care how many records you analyzed?

Nearly every single resume I see posted here emphasizes the number of records a particular analysis had in its source data. I can’t come up with reason why anyone would care about that. I work with ERP data and individual part inspection data in manufacturing. Is it more impressive or valuable that I “analyze” billions of records a week?

I can understand emphasizing outcomes in your resume, things like “improved customer retention by X%” or “delivered $1.5m hard savings”. And I can even understand highlighting the skills used in the process of the analysis. But highlighting something like the size of a dataset in your resume tells me that you think that is valuable, when it isn’t. And it seems like a bad idea to tell a recruiter or hiring manager that you think meaningless things are valuable. When I’m interviewing candidates and reviewing resumes, I’m trying to discern if they can recognize potential business impact and deliver a solution that realizes it. Emphasizing how many rows your analysis ingested tells me you’re focusing on the wrong things.

Am I missing something here? If you’ve experience as a hiring manager, interviewer, or recruiter, and you do see helpful signal in “analyzed 200,000 records”, please explain why.