Estimated annual leak · modeled range
$0a year
Modeled midpoint, prorated. Not a measured loss.
Marketplace · margin leak estimator
How much is your Marketplace marketing leaking?
Use your revenue, marketing spend and answers to explore a modeled annual opportunity range. Free, with no login or account access.
Use the results on your own, or choose a paid audit or a fit call. Both next steps are optional.
Free · No login · Nothing leaves your browser
Model reference: $66k/yr. Published cases: 7, lower median $66,000/yr. Separate buyer and seller acquisition, incentives and take rate contribution. Use platform revenue rather than gross merchandise value as the revenue input; the model does not estimate each side independently.
Live reading · updates on every answer
Leak risk score
Appears after your first answer. Based on your answers, not on the dollars.
Pick an industry to sharpen the range.
Directional model output. Not a measured loss or promised recovery. Formula and rates are disclosed below.
Step 1 of 7 · Tell us about the Marketplace business
Rough numbers are fine.
Tell us about the Marketplace business
Three quick inputs set your baseline. Rough numbers are fine, and nothing leaves your browser.
Quick start
Industry
Advanced: blended ROAS and site conversion rate (optional)
Optional, and it stays in your browser. Either number narrows your range instead of widening it: the model stops guessing at your efficiency and uses yours.
Choice steps advance on click. Nothing leaves your browser.
In their words · 5 Marketplace client statementsAll 60 client statements →
MARKETPLACE
$74k a year of wasted spend cut in 7 days
Courier bonuses paid into already full zones: 22% → 3%
“Incentive spend rose while service levels stayed flat. Alex matched bonus payouts against real time courier availability by zone: in dense areas we paid couriers who would have worked anyway. Bonuses now fire only where coverage is short.”
VP of Supply Growth · Marketplace · Food delivery
Written approvalUnder NDA7 days to findings
Alex PopSenior Auditor · signed this audit offMARKETPLACE
$66k a year of wasted spend cut in 6 days
Paid clicks the site already won organically: ~1 in 3 → ~1 in 30
“We were bidding on terms we already ranked for. Alex paused paid search on those terms in a test and bookings barely moved. Roughly one paid click in three we would have won for free. That spend now goes where paid actually adds demand.”
Head of Performance Marketing · Marketplace · Travel & experiences
Written approvalUnder NDA6 days to findings
Alex PopSenior Auditor · signed this audit offMARKETPLACE
$63k a year of wasted spend cut in 6 days
Supply incentives hitting a real shortage: 35% → 94%
“Our onboarding bonus solved a shortage we no longer had. Alex checked every incentive against current supply by category, and we were still paying to recruit providers in saturated ones. We kept bonuses only where supply is genuinely short.”
Head of Marketplace Supply · Marketplace · Services
Written approvalUnder NDA6 days to findings
Alex PopSenior Auditor · signed this audit offMARKETPLACE
$58k a year found in 6 days
Effective take rate after the old waivers: 9.5% → 12.5%
“Our effective take rate sat below our stated one for years. Alex traced it cohort by cohort to launch era fee waivers that had never been switched off. We retired them on matured cohorts and kept relief only for new participants.”
Head of Operations · Marketplace · Gig & freelance
Written approvalUnder NDA6 days to findings
Alex PopSenior Auditor · signed this audit offMARKETPLACE
$44k a year found in 7 days
Take rate actually kept vs the 15% contracted: 11.1% → 14.0%
“Finance couldn’t explain why we kept less than our contracted take rate. Alex traced every dollar from gross booking to net revenue and found it in refunds nobody owned. Clear rules and one accountable owner closed the gap.”
Chief Commercial Officer · Marketplace · Rentals
Written approvalUnder NDA7 days to findings
Alex PopSenior Auditor · signed this audit offThe calculator is free. An optional paid audit checks your account data and produces evidence for its findings.
What is the next step?
Keep your estimate, explore the case studies or request a paid audit. The calculator does not connect to your accounts. A fit call can help you assess whether an audit is appropriate.
Model assumptions and limitations
This calculator applies model assumptions to your inputs. Its range, comparison position and score are directional scenarios, not measured account losses, verified peer percentiles or a recovery promise. The industry reference amounts are model references, distinct from the lower medians of published case figures. Underlying calibration budgets and validation evidence are not published.
- Monthly marketing spend is multiplied by 12 and the selected industry rate band. Monthly revenue is multiplied by 12 and 0.84% to 1.63% for the second term. These two modeled terms are added, adjusted by your answers, and rounded.
- Higher spend changes the marketing term; higher revenue changes the pricing, margin and retention term. These terms may describe related economic effects, so their sum is a scenario for investigation, not additive proven savings.
- The comparison uses the marketing term only. Its reference is annual marketing spend multiplied by the middle point of the industry model curve. A position from 10 to 90 on that curve is not an observed peer percentile.
- The 0 to 100 score summarizes the selected answers. Category scores reflect allocated shares of the estimated midpoint, not independently measured health.
- Optional ROAS and conversion inputs scale the range against model reference values and narrow it by a fixed factor of 0.70 before rounding. A narrower interval does not establish greater statistical confidence.
- When spend exceeds half of revenue, a midpoint limit of 6% of annual revenue can activate. Rounding and minimum interval width still apply. This is a model safeguard, not an observed business limit.
Input and coefficient sensitivity are model behavior. Calibration periods, eligible budgets and validation errors are unavailable in the published cases.
Directional model estimates, not a diagnosis of your accounts. Nothing leaves your browser to produce this result.
Behind the Marketplace estimate
What the model assumes for Marketplace
The Marketplace model reference is $66k a year. Among the five modeled categories, Marketplace gives Wasted paid spend a 15% heavier weight in the category split and a head start as the first area to investigate when your answers point two ways.
The 7 published Marketplace cases are a separate statistic: a lower median annual highlight figure of $66,000, computed from the cases listed below, not from the model. The largest of them is CAC looked fine, until we split it by cohort, +$82k a year, found in 7 days.
What the Marketplace estimator asks
Every version of the calculator starts from monthly revenue and monthly marketing spend. Three of the seven questions then carry Marketplace options, listed here as the wizard shows them. Each option still maps to the same five leak categories, which is what keeps a Marketplace estimate comparable with any other.
Where does most of your marketing budget go?
The Marketplace channel mix. The answer moves weight between wasted paid spend and attribution.
- Buyer side acquisition: paid social & search
- Branded & category search
- Incentives, discounts & referral credits: Coupons, first order deals, ride/order credits
- Supply side acquisition & onboarding: Recruiting & onboarding sellers or providers
- Organic, SEO & CRM
- Honestly, I’m not sure
How do you mainly make money?
The Marketplace revenue model. The answer moves weight between pricing and retention.
- Commission / take rate on GMV
- Listing / subscription fees from sellers
- Seller ads & promoted listings
- Fulfillment / payment services: Payments, shipping or services you monetize
- A mix
- Not sure / it varies
Where do you suspect you lose the most?
The Marketplace vocabulary for the five categories. The answer orders the checklist; it never moves the score.
- Buyer acquisition that never transacts
- GMV & source attribution
- Search to order conversion
- Take rate, incentives & coupon burn
- Repeat GMV & marketplace liquidity: Buyers & sellers coming back without incentives
- Not sure: that’s why I’m here
Tracking and the optional inputs
Marketplace answers the tracking question on the web analytics scale, from a modeled, reconciled first party setup down to patchy or not sure.
Advanced, optional: a blended ROAS, placeholder 3.0, and a site conversion rate, placeholder 2.0%. Either one narrows the Marketplace range instead of widening it.
Three Marketplace leak patterns from the published cases
Each card names the cases it rests on; open one for its evidence. Together the cards cover all 7 published Marketplace cases. The Marketplace marketing audit page explains each pattern and shows the before and after of its largest case.
Incentives
Subsidies outrunning the value they buy
3 of the 7 published cases · $63k to $74k a year
- Supply side incentives outlived their purpose, −$63k a year
- Buyer subsidies outran the repeat GMV they were meant to unlock, +$66k a year
- Courier incentives overlapped organic supply in dense zones, −$74k a year
Paid acquisition
Blended CAC and bidding on demand you already own
2 of the 7 published cases · $66k to $82k a year
- CAC looked fine, until we split it by cohort, +$82k a year
- Paid search was bidding on supply the platform already ranked for, −$66k a year
Take rate
Take rate eroded by refunds and fee waivers
2 of the 7 published cases · $44k to $58k a year
- Take rate was leaking through unmanaged refunds, +$44k a year
- Promotional fee waivers were never switched off, +$58k a year
What an audit checks after a Marketplace estimate
- Incentive ROI by cohort against settled GMV, not booked GMV
- Paid and organic demand overlap by query class
- Effective take rate by segment, net of refunds and promos
- Supply side incentive overlap in dense zones
- Attribution across paid, organic and CRM driven demand
The estimate points at a category; the audit tests these 5 Marketplace checks against your own account data. Compare industries in the 2026 benchmark.
Why trust the estimate
A wasted ad spend calculator with explicit assumptions.
01
Industry model assumptions
The calculator uses industry rates and your inputs. Published case lower medians are shown separately so you can compare their definitions.
02
Understand the range
The interval describes a model scenario. It does not establish the percentage of comparable businesses that achieved that result.
03
The audit makes it real
An estimate can’t be acted on by itself. The audit names each leak, proves it with your data and hands you the fix. $10,000 to $50,000 of findings, or your money back.
Next step, optional
Turn estimates into evidence.
Fixed fee. 5 to 7 working days. $10,000 to $50,000 of findings, or your money back.
Questions about the Marketplace estimator.
Is the estimator really free, and what’s the catch?
Yes. The Marketplace calculator uses your inputs and the Marketplace model assumptions, with no account access. You can keep the results or choose an optional paid audit or fit call.
Does the calculator need access to my ad or analytics accounts?
No. It runs entirely in your browser from a few situational inputs, with Marketplace preselected as the industry. No logins and no account access, by design.
How accurate is the estimate?
It is a directional model using your inputs and Marketplace industry assumptions. Its range and comparison position are not verified peer percentiles or measured account losses. The 7 published Marketplace cases are a separate statistic, with a lower median annual highlight figure of $66,000 and a largest published case figure of $82,000 a year. An audit checks your own evidence.
What does the Marketplace estimator ask that the general calculator does not?
Three of its seven questions carry Marketplace options. Where the budget goes offers Buyer side acquisition: paid social & search, Branded & category search, Incentives, discounts & referral credits, Supply side acquisition & onboarding and Organic, SEO & CRM. How you make money offers Commission / take rate on GMV, Listing / subscription fees from sellers, Seller ads & promoted listings, Fulfillment / payment services and A mix. Where you suspect the loss offers Buyer acquisition that never transacts, GMV & source attribution, Search to order conversion, Take rate, incentives & coupon burn and Repeat GMV & marketplace liquidity. Each answer still maps to the same five leak categories, so a Marketplace estimate is comparable with any other.
Why does the Marketplace calculator ask for a blended ROAS?
It is optional. The Marketplace version offers two advanced inputs, a blended ROAS with 3.0 as the placeholder reference and a site conversion rate with 2.0% as the placeholder. Either number narrows your Marketplace range rather than widening it, because the model stops guessing at your efficiency and uses yours. Leave both empty and the range stays wider.
Marketplace wasted ad spend calculator: model and case evidence
This calculator applies model assumptions to your inputs. Its range, comparison position and score are directional scenarios, not measured account losses, verified peer percentiles or a recovery promise. The industry reference amounts are model references, distinct from the lower medians of published case figures. Underlying calibration budgets and validation evidence are not published.
Separate buyer and seller acquisition, incentives and take rate contribution. Use platform revenue rather than gross merchandise value as the revenue input; the model does not estimate each side independently.
Scroll horizontally to compare all columns on a narrow screen.
| Industry | Published cases | Model reference / year | Case lower median / year |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marketplace | 7 | $66k | $66,000 |
The population is the 74 published case studies, with one selected highlight figure per case. It is not a representative sample of all SMBs or a total of every finding in each audit. A lower median is the middle value after sorting, using the lower of the two middle values for an even count. Published annual figures include different outcome types; they are not all collected cash, profit or recurring savings. Case publication dates do not establish common observation, implementation or recovery periods; use each case for its supported timing and outcome.