The traditional definition of volumetric sweep efficiency sums the effects of both fingering (arising due to contrasts in mobility) and bypassing (arising due to contrasts in permeability as well as well placement). Accordingly, we cannot quantitatively attribute poor sweep to either bypassing or fingering. Similarly, in EOR, the incremental recovery cannot be quantitatively associated with the reduction of those effects. For such purposes, we rely on visualization and mapping of saturation profiles to quantify and characterize the remaining oil in place including its distribution. . In this work, we propose a complementary method to obtain an instantaneous insight of the remaining oil distribution. We demonstrate the decomposition of fingering and bypassing effects and its utility. We first redefine recovery factors such that we decouple bypassing and fingering effects. We then validate those redefined sweep indicators by examining a 5-spot waterflood and two idealistic polymer floods. Later, we demonstrate the possible utility of those redefined sweep indicators through different examples. In one example, we compare the performance of a shear - thinning polymer to a recovery-equivalent Newtonian polymer. Using fingering and bypassing sweep indicators, we can immediately conclude that the shear-thinning polymer exacerbates bypassing. We recommend the adoption of our redefined sweep indicators in any simulation suite. They provide instant understanding of sweep and hence can be complementary to standard practices of oil saturation mapping and of special value when analyzing the results of multiple realizations and/or development scenarios.