Startup Idea Validator & Unit Economics

Most start-up ideas fail not because the product is bad but because the assumptions behind it were never tested. This tool does two jobs. A ten-question scorecard turns your assumptions into a number so you can compare ideas and see your weakest areas. An optional unit economics section tests whether a customer is worth more than they cost to win. Neither predicts success, but both show where to look next.

The scorecard

You rate each question from 1 to 5, where 1 is the weakest answer and 5 clearly yes. The questions and weights are: how painful the problem is (15), how often it happens (10), how many people have it (10), whether they will pay for a fix (15), whether you can reach them cheaply (10), whether your answer is clearly different (10), whether you are the right people to build it (10), whether you can build a first version soon (10), whether now is a good moment (5) and whether you can stand out from competitors (5). The weights favour pain and willingness to pay.

Each question’s points are (rating − 1) ÷ 4 × weight. A 3 earns half the weight, a 4 earns 75% and a 5 the full weight. The total out of 100 is rated Weak below 40, Unproven from 40, Promising from 60 and Strong from 80. A box for the number of potential customers you have actually talked to adds a warning when it is below ten.

Weakest areas

The tool ranks questions by how many points you lose, which is the weight times the shortfall from 5, and shows the three biggest with a test to run next. For willingness to pay it suggests asking for a pre-order, a deposit or a letter of intent, not just praise. For reach it suggests a small test ad or a post in one community, and for market size, counting reachable customers from public data.

Unit economics

Switch on the unit economics section and enter revenue per customer per month, gross margin, the share of customers lost each month and the cost to win one customer. Lifetime value is revenue × margin ÷ churn, the expected lifetime is 100 ÷ churn in months, the ratio is lifetime value ÷ cost to win a customer, and payback is that cost ÷ monthly margin. A common rule of thumb for subscription businesses is a ratio of about 3 or more and a payback under 12 months. Below 3, the tool warns, and churn of zero is rejected because lifetime value would be unlimited.

Worked results

The first sample rates ten questions mostly 3s and 4s and has spoken to 6 customers: it scores 65 out of 100, Promising, with a warning about the thin evidence. With revenue of 30, margin of 80%, churn of 5% and a cost to win of 120, monthly margin is 24, lifetime value is 480, the average life is 20 months, the ratio is 4.0 to 1 and payback is 5.0 months. The second sample, “Strong evidence”, rates mostly 4s and 5s after 32 conversations, with 49 revenue, 85% margin, 3% churn and a cost to win of 90. It scores 88 and Strong, with a lifetime value of about 1,388, a ratio of 15.4 and payback in 2.2 months.

Using the result

Pick the weakest area and design the cheapest test that could change your rating: five interviews, a landing page, a pre-sale. Re-score after the test. If the economics fail, ask which input could change: price, margin, churn or acquisition cost, and whether that is realistic.

Limits

The score structures your own ratings, and the weights are this tool’s judgement, so the number is only as honest as your inputs. The lifetime value model assumes constant churn and margin, which real businesses rarely have, and the ratio and payback targets are rules of thumb. Nothing is uploaded.

Related tools

• Lean Canvas Maker writes down the assumptions that the scorecard rates.
• Break-Even Calculator shows how many sales cover fixed costs.
• Business Model Canvas Maker lays out the whole model once the idea looks promising.
• Domain Name & Brand Name Scorer helps with the next practical step, choosing a name.