Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

unit-economics-modeling

Use when modeling CAC, LTV, payback, contribution margin, or burn-multiple per customer — SaaS, marketplace, or transactional. Triggers on 'are we unit-economic', 'what is our LTV/CAC'.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

See how to install

Files included (3)

  • SKILL.md9.1 KB
  • evals/domain-truth.json2.2 KB
  • evals/evals.json984 B

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

unit-economics-modeling

When to use

  • A board ask: "is this business unit-economic?" — needs CAC / LTV / payback, not vibes.
  • A new channel is scaling and the question is whether the CAC payback period is sustainable.
  • A pricing or packaging change needs to be tested against contribution margin per cohort.
  • A finance-partner needs to construct burn-multiple cognition before the next forecast or scenario pass.

Do NOT use for full-business intrinsic-value modeling, OKR setting, funnel-stage diagnosis, or backlog ranking (see Related Skills).

Cognition cluster

  • Mental model 1 — First principles. Strip the unit to one paying customer and one fully-loaded acquisition dollar. Aggregate ratios ride on per-unit truth; if the unit is mis-defined (trial vs paid, household vs seat), every ratio downstream is decoration. See docs/contracts/mental-models.md § 1.
  • Mental model 8 — Second-order thinking. A CAC drop driven by discounting lifts LTV/CAC on paper while shortening cohort retention — the second-order effect lands two quarters later in churn. Score the second-order cost of every lever, not just the first-order ratio. See mental-models.md § 8.
  • Context-spine — product + fiscal-period. Read the product slot for what a "customer" actually is in this scope (seat vs household vs paid trial vs activated free), and the fiscal-period slot for the close-window the ratios must reconcile against (monthly close vs quarterly board pack vs annual plan). See context-spine.

Procedure

Step 0: Inspect

  1. Confirm the business shape — SaaS / marketplace / transactional. The three canonical cases differ in revenue recognition and churn definition, not in arithmetic.
  2. Confirm a fully-loaded CAC is computable: paid spend + sales comp + content/SEO allocation + tooling. Marketing-spend-only CAC is a vanity metric.

Step 1: Compute CAC per channel

  1. CAC = (fully-loaded acquisition spend in window) / (new paying customers acquired in same window). Match window to sales-cycle length, not calendar quarter.
  2. Compute by channel and blended. Blended-only hides the channel that is breaking the average.
  3. Anti-pattern: counting trial signups as customers. Customer = first paid charge cleared.

Step 2: Compute gross margin

  1. Gross margin = (revenue − COGS) / revenue. COGS includes hosting, payment fees, third-party APIs the customer's usage drives, and direct customer-success cost.
  2. Gross margin must be per dollar of revenue, not per customer. Per-customer gross margin is contribution margin (Step 3).
  3. SaaS healthy band: 70–85%. Marketplace: 15–40%. Transactional: 5–25%. Outside these — the business is mislabelled or the COGS allocation is wrong.

Step 3: Compute LTV

  1. Pick the canonical formula for the case:
    • SaaS: LTV = ARPA × gross_margin / monthly_churn_rate. Use net-dollar churn for self-serve, gross logo churn for high-touch.
    • Marketplace: LTV = take_rate × GMV_per_user × retention_curve_AUC over 24 months. Steady-state extrapolation is dishonest below 24 months of cohort data.
    • Transactional: LTV = avg_order_value × gross_margin × purchases_per_year × avg_lifetime_years.
  2. Cap implied lifetime at 5 years for any business with < 3 years of cohort history. Anything longer is a fairy tale.
  3. State the formula used inline. Do not let the reader infer.

Step 4: Compute payback and ratio

  1. CAC payback (months) = CAC / (ARPA × gross_margin) for SaaS; analogue for marketplace and transactional. Healthy SaaS: ≤ 12 months.
  2. LTV / CAC ratio: target ≥ 3.0. Below 1.5 is acquisition-loss territory; above 5.0 means under-investment in growth (or bad LTV math).
  3. Both numbers, not one. Payback drives capital efficiency; ratio drives long-run economics.

Step 5: Compute burn-multiple judgment

  1. Burn multiple = net burn / net new ARR over the fiscal-period slot's reporting window (monthly close / quarterly / annual). It answers "how many dollars of cash do we burn to add one dollar of recurring revenue?" — a single ratio that condenses CAC, gross margin, and churn into capital efficiency.
  2. Compute on net new ARR (gross new − churn − contraction). Burn-multiple on gross new ARR flatters the picture by exactly the churn rate; auditors and acquirers will recompute.
  3. Read the ratio against the org-stage colour from the fiscal-period + product spine — do not hardcode a band here. The cognition is "smaller is better, and the direction across cohorts matters more than the point estimate." Bands belong in runway-cognition (O3) where stage context is the load-bearing input.

Step 6: Cohort the answer

  1. Run Steps 1–5 by signup-quarter cohort. Trends matter more than the point estimate.
  2. If LTV/CAC is improving but payback is lengthening, you are buying retention with discounting — flag.
  3. If both deteriorate, the channel mix has shifted to a worse channel — segment by channel to find the leak.

Step 7: Validate

  1. Sanity-check LTV against revenue retention. If implied LTV > 8× annual revenue per customer with monthly churn > 2%, the math is wrong.
  2. Sanity-check CAC against fully-loaded P&L. If channel CACs sum to less than total acquisition spend, allocations are missing.

Gotcha

  • Marketing-spend-only CAC is the most common deception. Sales comp, BDR salaries, content production, and tooling all belong in fully-loaded CAC.
  • Net-dollar retention > 100% does not justify ignoring logo churn — they answer different questions.
  • ARPA averaged across plan tiers hides churn concentrated in one tier. Compute per tier when tiers differ in price by more than 2×.
  • Payback period using contribution margin (post variable-cost) is honest; payback using gross revenue is the kind of math VCs see in pitch decks and discount on sight.

Do NOT

  • Do NOT extrapolate LTV beyond observable cohort data without saying so explicitly.
  • Do NOT mix freemium activation rates with paid CAC; they live in different universes.
  • Do NOT report a single LTV/CAC for a business with multiple distinct customer segments — segment first.

Related Skills

WHEN to use this

  • The question is per-customer economics (CAC, LTV, payback, contribution margin).
  • The decision is whether to scale a channel or pricing tier.

WHEN NOT to use this

  • Whole-business intrinsic value with terminal value — route to dcf-modeling.
  • Diagnosing where conversion drops — route to funnel-analysis.
  • Ranking competing initiatives — route to rice-prioritization.
  • Setting team objectives that move these metrics — route to okr-tree-modeling.
  • Cash-runway shape, fundraise-trigger heuristics, or layoff-vs-cut-vs-grow framing — route to runway-cognition (O3).
  • Multi-statement scenario construction over base / upside / downside — route to scenario-modeling (O4).
  • Forecast-call construction (commit / best-case / pipeline) — route to forecasting (O2).

Wing-4 handoff: this skill ships the unit-economics-frame.md artifact that scenario-modeling (O4) reads as its money input (docs/guidelines/wing4-handoff.md § Chain 1).

When the agent should load this

  • "What's our LTV / CAC?"
  • "Is this channel paying back fast enough?"
  • "Compute unit economics for this pricing tier."
  • "Are we unit-economic at this CAC?"
  • "Cohort our payback period."

Output

  1. unit-econ-table.md — table per channel and blended: CAC · ARPA · gross margin · payback months · LTV · LTV/CAC · burn-multiple. With cohort columns (last 4 quarters).
  2. assumptions.md — formula chosen (SaaS / marketplace / transactional), churn definition, COGS allocation method, lifetime cap. One bullet per choice.
  3. cohort-trend.md — trend chart (ASCII or markdown table) of CAC, payback, LTV/CAC, burn-multiple over the last 4–8 cohorts. Annotate channel-mix shifts.
  4. sanity-checks.md — explicit cross-checks (LTV vs annual revenue, channel CAC sum vs P&L). Flag any that fail with a one-line investigation pointer.
  5. unit-economics-frame.md (Wing-4 handoff) — the typed artifact scenario-modeling (O4) reads: CAC / LTV ratio, contribution margin, payback band, burn-multiple verdict, segment scope, fiscal-period the frame reconciles against. Per docs/guidelines/wing4-handoff.md § Chain 1.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

Use when reviewing UI for accessibility — WCAG 2.2 AA, keyboard nav, focus, ARIA, contrast, screen-reader semantics — even on 'is this a11y-OK?' or 'mach das barrierefrei'.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

event4u-app/agent-config12Updated Oct 19, 2026

Use when defining or auditing the activation event — aha-moment selection, retention correlation, falsifiable definition. Triggers on 'what is our aha moment', 'redefine activation'.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

event4u-app/agent-config12Updated Oct 19, 2026

Use when capturing an architectural decision — file naming, next ADR number, Status / Context / Decision / Consequences, index regen; fires even without saying 'ADR'.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

event4u-app/agent-config12Updated Oct 19, 2026

Adversarial critique — devil's advocate, stress-test, honest teardown ('poke holes', 'be brutal', 'was hältst du davon'); explicit request only. Routine code or design review → code-review.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

event4u-app/agent-config12Updated Oct 19, 2026

Use when reading, creating, or updating agent documentation, module docs, roadmaps, or AGENTS.md. Understands the full .augment/, agents/, and copilot-instructions structure.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

event4u-app/agent-config12Updated Oct 19, 2026

Use for an adversarial red-team / blue-team / auditor review of an AI agent's CONFIG + behaviour (rules, skills, MCP, hooks, permissions) — attack-chain → defensive-gap list, not a code audit.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

event4u-app/agent-config12Updated Oct 19, 2026

See all skills by event4u-app

Report a problem with this skill