Trusted by sales leaders at OpenAI, Red Hat, HPE, Zscaler, and Rubrik, and 100,000+ sellers daily.
Manual review only reaches the deals someone has time for.
A manager can deeply review two or three deals in a busy week. Every other deal gets a status check, if that. The scoring gap isn't an accuracy problem, it's a coverage problem, and it hits the deals nobody had time to look at closely just as hard as the ones that are actually fine.
Confidence and evidence often point different directions
A rep feels good about a relationship the data shows has gone quiet. Both can't be right, and only one of them is checkable.
Stage tells you where a rep put the deal, not where it is
A deal can sit in "negotiation" for weeks with no matching change in engagement. Stage is a field a rep moves. It isn't a fact about the deal.
The deals nobody reviewed are often the riskiest ones
The forecast call has time for a handful of deals. The rest ride on whatever stage and gut feel say, which is exactly where surprises come from.
What actually feeds a reliable score
Age measured against the stage average shows whether a deal is moving on schedule or stuck. Engagement recency and spread of buyer activity keeps confidence honest against the data.
Coverage across one contact or a real buying committee flags single-threaded risk. Trend over the last 30 days beats a single snapshot.
- Deal age benchmarked against typical time-in-stage
- Engagement recency and spread across the buying committee
- Stakeholder coverage, flagging single-threaded deals
- 30-day trend direction, not a point-in-time read
Where scores and reality diverge
A deal in negotiation with zero buyer activity in three weeks. Stage advanced with no matching change in engagement. A rep confident about a relationship the data shows has gone quiet.
A consistent meeting cadence backing up a stage placement, which is what a healthy score should look like.
- Stage advancement with no engagement to support it
- Rep confidence contradicted by activity data
- Meeting cadence that actually matches the deal's stated stage
- Silence at a stage where activity should be increasing
What good scoring includes
Every open opportunity scored, not a sample. Weighted by activity, not stage alone. Updated continuously, not on a weekly manual pass.
Delivered where the review already happens, not in a separate report nobody opens.
- Covers every open deal, not just the ones flagged for review
- Weights real activity over self-reported stage
- Recalculates continuously instead of a scheduled batch
- Shows up inside the CRM or forecast tool already in use
What changes when your team has the answers.
Visibility into activity, pipeline, and execution fuels better decisions, faster corrections, and more predictable outcomes - without requiring reps to change their workflow.
FAQ
Common questions.
How is opportunity scoring different from deal stage?
Stage is set manually by a rep. Opportunity scoring is calculated from real engagement data and updates on its own.
Does every deal get scored, or just flagged ones?
Every open opportunity gets scored on the same criteria, not a sample selected for review.
Can this replace our stage-based forecast process?
It's built to sit alongside stage and validate it, catching the deals where stage and actual engagement have drifted apart.
How often does the score update?
Continuously, as new activity comes in, rather than on a weekly or monthly cadence.
What happens when a rep disagrees with a score?
The scoring shows the underlying activity, so the conversation becomes about the evidence rather than a disagreement over gut feel.
Does this work for both new business and renewal deals?
Yes. The same activity-based scoring applies across new logo and renewal opportunities.
