Revenue Leakage Quantifier · Founder Edition · NIR Growth

NIR · Growth

NIR Growth · Diagnostic Instrument

Revenue Leakage Quantifier

A directional diagnostic for B2B SaaS founders. Estimates the gap between the revenue your business is generating and the revenue your customer base would support at right-fit pricing — across three structural mechanisms that don't show up in the P&L. Calibrated against published benchmarks from OpenView, ProfitWell, Paddle, and Simon-Kucher.

Founder Edition Seven inputs. Live calculation. A range, not a single number — because that's what the math honestly supports. The full instrument runs against your billing data inside the Revenue Architecture Audit.

Best fit B2B SaaS, £1M–£10M ARR, pricing untouched for 18+ months, founder-led commercial team.

~30%

of B2B SaaS customer churn is attributable to pricing or perceived value misalignment

ProfitWell · Paddle 2022

+14%

median uplift to net dollar retention from pricing changes among expansion-stage SaaS

OpenView · 2023 Benchmarks

40%

of B2B SaaS companies have not revisited their pricing structure in 18+ months

OpenView · 2024 Benchmarks

>20%

improvement in base monetization observed from optimised packaging and pricing redesigns

Simon-Kucher · Software Study

i. About the business

Current ARR

Total paying customers

ii. Tier signals

Look at your two end tiers — the lowest paid plan and the highest. We diagnose two types of structural leakage from how customers are using them.

Lowest tier price

Per month, per customer

Highest tier price

Per month, per customer

Lowest-tier customers using like a higher-tier customer

Heavy users, high engagement, complex use cases — but still on the entry plan.

Top-tier customers hitting usage ceiling with no overage charged

Routinely exceed plan limits, but the model has no overage mechanism.

Advanced — adjust ranges if you have data

Underpricing gap (Leak 1) 25–75%

Default range: underpriced customers are paying 25–75% less than right-fit pricing across the gap between current and top tier. Range derived from B2B SaaS pricing audit observations and ProfitWell willingness-to-pay research showing 23% average ARPU uplift from WTP-calibrated pricing.

Overage capture rate (Leak 2) 15–40%

Default range: overage value typically represents 15–40% of base subscription value for usage-based B2B SaaS. Based on OpenView usage-based pricing research and Paddle consumption pricing benchmarks.

Pricing-driven share of churn (Leak 3) 25–40%

ProfitWell research attributes ~30% of B2B SaaS churn to pricing-related causes; Paddle's 2022 study found 40% of churned customers cited "too expensive for the value provided." The 25–40% range brackets these findings.

iii. Churn signal

Pricing-driven churn is rarely logged as such — it's typically misattributed to "competitive loss" or "no decision."

Total customers churned in the last 12 months

Total churn count — the calculator applies the 25–40% pricing-driven share automatically.

Live Diagnostic Output

Annual Revenue Leakage

Estimated range, calibrated against published benchmarks

£0 — £0

0% – 0% of ARR being left on the table

Fill in the inputs to see your leakage breakdown across the three structural mechanisms.

Get the full PDF report

A branded breakdown with sources cited — keep, share with your co-founder, or include in your next investor update.

Sent — check your inbox. The PDF is also downloading now.

Book a Revenue Architecture Audit →

Methodology

How the math works

Leak 1 — Tier underpricing. For each lowest-tier customer behaving like a higher-tier customer, the leakage range is calculated as the gap between current tier and top tier price, multiplied by an adjustment factor of 25% (low estimate) to 75% (high estimate), annualised. The 25% lower bound assumes these customers are best-priced at one tier above current; the 75% upper bound assumes they belong on the top tier. The audit replaces this assumption with a Van Westendorp Price Sensitivity Meter run against your actual customer base.

Leak 2 — Uncaptured overage. For each top-tier customer hitting the usage ceiling with no overage mechanism, the leakage range is calculated as 15–40% of top-tier price, annualised. The range brackets typical overage capture rates observed in usage-based B2B SaaS pricing models. The audit replaces this with a Gabor-Granger demand curve to identify the optimal overage price point.

Leak 3 — Pricing-driven exits. Total churned customers, multiplied by 25–40% (assumed pricing-driven share), multiplied by blended ACV (ARR ÷ total customers). The 25–40% range reflects ProfitWell's research finding ~30% of B2B SaaS churn is pricing-attributable, alongside Paddle's 2022 study finding 40% of churned customers cite "too expensive for the value provided." Strictly speaking, this is permanent ARR exit rather than ongoing leakage, but it shares the same structural root cause.

What this instrument is, and isn't. The Founder Edition produces a directional estimate calibrated against published industry benchmarks — sufficient to surface whether revenue architecture is worth a closer look, not sufficient to act on. The full Revenue Leakage Quantifier, run inside the Revenue Architecture Audit, replaces every benchmarked coefficient with customer-validated data: Van Westendorp price sensitivity testing, Gabor-Granger demand modelling, and cohort retention analysis. The audit produces a precise, board-defensible figure with three modelled redesign scenarios.

Calibrated against

Published benchmarks and primary research

~30% of B2B SaaS churn is pricing-attributable

Pricing-related issues consistently identified as a leading cause of voluntary churn across multiple subscription analytics datasets.

ProfitWell Pricing Research

40% of churned SaaS customers cite "too expensive for the value provided"

Primary reason given by churned customers across B2B SaaS in Paddle's customer exit research, suggesting price-to-value misalignment is the modal churn cause.

Paddle 2022 Churn Study

+14% median NDR uplift from pricing changes

Among expansion-stage B2B SaaS companies in OpenView's 2023 Benchmarks. Single largest controllable lever for retention-driven growth identified in the report.

OpenView 2023 SaaS Benchmarks

40% of SaaS companies haven't touched pricing in 18+ months

Trigger condition for revenue architecture intervention. The 18-month threshold correlates strongly with structural leakage from price-value drift.

OpenView 2024 SaaS Benchmarks

>20% base monetization improvement from packaging optimisation

Range observed across Simon-Kucher's B2B SaaS engagements: optimised packaging delivers >10% new logo inflow lift, >15% average spend lift, >20% base monetization improvement.

Simon-Kucher Software Study

23% higher ARPU among companies measuring willingness-to-pay

Quantifies the ARPU gap between SaaS companies running formal WTP research (Van Westendorp, Gabor-Granger) and those relying on competitor benchmarking or cost-plus pricing.

ProfitWell WTP Research

30% lower churn for SaaS with 3+ pricing tiers

Tier structure as a churn-reduction mechanism: deeper tier laddering provides lower-friction expansion and downgrade paths, reducing exit-on-mismatch.

Bessemer State of the Cloud

57% of SaaS companies spend <10 hrs/quarter on pricing

Pricing remains the most under-resourced commercial function in B2B SaaS despite its disproportionate impact on growth and retention.

OpenView 2023 SaaS Benchmarks

106% median NRR for B2B SaaS in 2024–2025

Floor for retention-led growth. Companies with 98% NRR (the $1M–$10M ARR median) face a structural growth ceiling that pricing redesign typically lifts.

High Alpha · OpenView 2024

GET A QUOTE