Cross-system math on whether your sales team is right-sized for your revenue. S&M as % of ARR, revenue per AE, rep-to-manager ratio, S&M efficiency. Flagged against B2B SaaS benchmarks per stage.
01
Enter your inputs
Total ARR, headcount by role, average OTEs, sales tech, marketing spend. Numbers that live across Finance / HRIS / marketing platforms.
02
See efficiency ratios
S&M as % of ARR, revenue per AE, revenue per S&M dollar, rep:manager ratio. Board-relevant numbers.
03
Get benchmarked diagnosis
Under-invested / Healthy / Bloated tier for your stage, plus top 3 optimization moves ranked by leverage.
Your inputs
Revenue + Team + Cost
Revenue + Stage
$
Annualized recurring revenue as of today.
Sets the benchmark bands for S&M %, revenue per AE, etc.
Team Composition
Front-line quota-carrying reps.
Prospecting-focused reps who don't carry a closing quota.
Front-line managers coaching AEs / BDRs. Not VP-level.
Dedicated ops/enablement heads supporting the sales team.
Compensation Averages (fully loaded OTE)
$
Fully loaded: base + full variable at 100%. Excludes benefits (added later).
Fill in all inputs above and I'll generate an efficiency diagnosis: whether your team is under-invested, healthy, or bloated for your stage, plus the top 3 optimization moves.
Top 3 optimization moves
Share this analysis
Portable evidence for an internal argument. No email required.
Copied to clipboard
S&M efficiency is the single most-scrutinized number in your next raise.
Investors look at S&M as % of ARR, revenue per AE, and payback period first. A Foundry Diagnostic tells you exactly where your current team structure is inefficient โ and the Playbook designs the operating system that your team runs that makes efficiency compound quarter over quarter.