New transgenic (GM) crops are subjected to extensive safety assessments that include compositional comparisons with conventional counterparts as a cornerstone of the process. The influence of germplasm, location, environment, and agronomic treatments on compositional variability is, however, often obscured in these pair-wise comparisons. Furthermore, classical statistical significance testing can often provide an incomplete and over-simplified summary of highly responsive variables such as crop composition. In order to more clearly describe the influence of the numerous sources of compositional variation we present an introduction to two alternative but complementary approaches to data analysis and interpretation. These include i) exploratory data analysis (EDA) with its emphasis on visualization and graphics-based approaches and ii) Bayesian statistical methodology that provides easily interpretable and meaningful evaluations of data in terms of probability distributions. The EDA case-studies include analyses of herbicide-tolerant GM soybean and insect-protected GM maize and soybean. Bayesian approaches are presented in an analysis of herbicide-tolerant GM soybean. Advantages of these approaches over classical frequentist significance testing include the more direct interpretation of results in terms of probabilities pertaining to quantities of interest and no confusion over the application of corrections for multiple comparisons. It is concluded that a standardized framework for these methodologies could provide specific advantages through enhanced clarity of presentation and interpretation in comparative assessments of crop composition.