Professional GTM Assessment: The 3-min Version!

Oct 2

From 25 Benchmarks to 10 Questions: How I Built the Alpine Revenue Rating

By Andrew Phillips, Founder of The Alpine System. Andrew has spent 15+ years inside private equity and venture-backed companies, building and repairing GTM systems for high-growth SaaS and services firms.
At The Alpine System, he works with leadership teams to stop revenue leaks, install scalable operating rhythms, and create sustainable growth frameworks that investors trust.

TL;DR: I studied respected GTM benchmarks, distilled them into 25 metrics of revenue health, then engineered a 10‑question diagnostic that outputs a clear Revenue Rating (0–100) with prioritized fixes. It blends human heuristics, rules‑based guardrails, and light ML so the score is explainable, consistent, and actionable - not a black box.

The Problem I Wanted to Solve

Leaders are drowning in metrics and starving for signal. I could build a comprehensive, 25‑point GTM diagnostic (and I did), but no one wants to wade through a questionnaire that feels like a tax return. To be useful, a diagnostic must be fast, credible, and prescriptive.

So I kept the depth, but compressed the interface: 10 smart questions that infer what I need to know, then map your answers to the deeper system.

The Research: Building a Defensible Benchmark Spine

I reviewed current, respected sources to anchor reality - then normalized them into a consistent frame. My goal: establish stage‑aware “healthy ranges” rather than cherry‑picked anecdotes.

Benchmarks reviewed (selection)

Bridge Group (AE quotas/OTE), ScaleVP & ScaleXP (burn multiples, Rule of 40, CAC payback), Gradient.Works (conversions), SaaStr & Kellblog (pipeline & cycles), ChurnZero/ChartMogul (expansion), Gainsight (CS ratios), Wudpecker/Vitally/Burkland (retention & churn), CustomerGauge/Bain (NPS), Userpilot (TTV), HarvestROI (response SLAs).

I organized everything into five pillars and 25 metrics that consistently predict downstream outcomes:

        Five Pillars & 25 Metrics
        Accountability — quota attainment, magic number, Rule of 40, burn multiple, LTV:CAC.
Pipeline — coverage, conversion to revenue, CAC payback, cycle length, lead velocity, marketing contribution, multichannel touches.
Conversion — inbound → MQL, MQL → SQL, SQL → Opp, win rate, response SLAs/persistence.
Delivery/Expansion — NRR/GRR, churn, CS cost %, ARR per CSM, expansion rate, NPS.
Process/Structure — SLAs in place, time‑to‑value.

      

Full benchmark table is available in the assessment — this post focuses on how the Rating works.

Why 10 Questions (Not 25+)

Adoption > theory. Busy execs complete 10 questions. They won’t finish 40.
Signal density. Each question is designed to proxy multiple metrics at once.
Explainability. A shorter front‑end plus a transparent back‑end makes the outcome easier to defend with your team and board.

Under the Hood: Human Insight + Rules + ML

This is not a vibes‑only quiz, and it’s not a pure ML black box. It’s a system:

Normalize Inputs

Your answers are converted to consistent scales (e.g., days → 0–100, ratios → bounded scores).

Infer Business Maturity

We classify “where you are” with a small set of signals (revenue band, deal size/velocity, go‑to‑market motion). That selects the right benchmark ranges.

Rules‑Based Guardrails

Deterministic checks prevent nonsense (e.g., pipeline coverage < 3× cannot produce an “excellent” pipeline score, regardless of optimism elsewhere).

Lightweight ML Weighting

A simple model learns sensible weights from patterns across companies and stages, emphasizing downstream‑critical drivers (retention, payback, win rate) over vanity volume.

Human Heuristics & Overrides

15+ years in venture‑backed environments inform edge‑case handling and explanations. This is where context (market, motion, ACV mix) matters.

Explainable Output

You get a Revenue Rating (0–100), five pillar subscores, and 2–3 prioritized sprint fixes with plain‑English reasons.

What the Score Represents (and What It Doesn’t)

Represents: A stage‑aware picture of revenue system health today, with actionable leverage points that move downstream outcomes fastest.

Doesn’t: Predict next quarter by itself or replace leadership judgment. It’s designed to reduce ambiguity so you make faster, better calls.

Example: How One Answer Fans Out

Question (compressed)

“How many months from opportunity creation to close for your primary ACV band?”

Maps to: Sales cycle, influences pipeline conversion, interacts with coverage, constrains forecast reliability.
Guardrail: If cycle length is long and win rate is low, the engine won’t reward high MQL counts.
Outcome: Score nudges you toward pipeline hygiene + deal progression checkpoints rather than “more top‑of‑funnel.”

Why This Matters Now

At $5\text{M}–\$50\text{M}$ scale, pressure shows up downstream first: cycles drag, churn creeps, CAC swells. Those are symptoms. The Rating helps you see the upstream causes and apply small, targeted fixes that move revenue quality quickly.

What You Receive

Revenue Rating (0–100) + five pillar subscores
Peer context vs. stage‑appropriate benchmarks
Top 2–3 Sprint Fixes prioritized by downstream impact
Optional: a deep dive mapping to the full 25‑metric table during a teardown or assessment workshop

Try It (No Obligation)

Take the Alpine Revenue Rating in just 3 minutes.
You’ll see your score immediately and get an email breakdown.
If you want to go deeper, book a free teardown - we’ll unpack the “why” behind
your number and outline exactly which moves to make this quarter.

Get Your 3‑Minute Revenue Rating Schedule a Free Teardown Fund Investor? Operating Partner? Click Here The Alpine System Homepage

Postscript for Operators Who Want the Receipts

If you’d like the full 25-point metric benchmark table with ranges and notes, ask for it in the teardown. I’ll walk you through how each metric influences the five pillars and why certain weights dominate at different stages.

Strategic note: The complete benchmark framework is shared with clients who complete their Revenue Rating as part of the deeper engagement process. This ensures you get the full context needed to understand your score and prioritize your systematic fixes effectively.

A Phillips