Startup
Ship-or-Kill Decision Score
Get a blunt SHIP, ITERATE, or KILL verdict on a side project from traction, economics, momentum, efficiency, and market signal.
Result
8 paying customers is real signal, but $160/mo MRR won't sustain this. You need to 10x your price, your customer count, or both. Focus on understanding why those 8 customers pay.
Dimension breakdown
Each dimension scored 0–100; weights determine the composite.
Dimension insights
- Traction45 / 100, weight 35%
8 paying customers is real signal. Now figure out why they pay and find 50 more like them.
- Economics90 / 100, weight 20%
Revenue is 3x+ costs. The economics work. Scale distribution, not features.
- Momentum40 / 100, weight 15%
5% WoW growth is decent. Sustain it for 8 weeks and you'll have real compounding.
- Efficiency40 / 100, weight 15%
10h/week with 200 hours invested. Make sure each hour is moving a metric, not just shipping code.
- Market60 / 100, weight 15%
4 competitors in a market where you're not clearly unique. You need a wedge — a specific use case or audience nobody else owns.
What to do next
- 1.Double down on whatever is driving growth. Document and systematize it before it fades.
- 2.Track hours by activity type (building vs. selling vs. marketing). Shift ratio toward revenue-generating work.
- 3.Set a 30-day checkpoint with specific metrics. If the numbers don't improve, make a hard call.
How to use it
- Enter your time investment: total hours spent building so far and hours per week you can realistically dedicate going forward. Be honest with both numbers because the scoring specifically penalizes the sunk-cost pattern, where past investment pulls you into committing more. If you have put in more than 500 hours with $0 MRR, the efficiency dimension loses points regardless of how polished the product is. This is intentional: long building without market validation is the classic symptom of a product nobody wants yet. The score treats time-without-traction as a risk signal, not as progress.
- Enter your traction metrics: number of paying customers, current monthly recurring revenue (MRR), free monthly active users, and week-over-week growth rate. Traction carries 35% of the score, the largest weight in the model, because money and usage are the most direct evidence that someone wants the product. Even a single paying customer is a meaningful signal because it proves that someone values the product enough to exchange money for it. Zero paying customers after months of building is an equally strong signal in the opposite direction. For growth rate, Paul Graham's essay 'Startup = Growth' (2012) calls 5-7% a week a good rate during Y Combinator and 10% a week exceptional; flat or negative growth after launch is a warning sign requiring immediate investigation. Revenue growth compounds: 5% weekly growth on a $1,000 MRR base produces approximately $12,600 MRR in 12 months.
- Enter your economics: monthly cost to operate the product (hosting, APIs, tools, marketing spend) and monthly revenue. The economics dimension checks whether your path to profitability is realistic. Products that are already profitable or approaching break-even score highest. Products burning cash with a clear path to profitability through demonstrated unit economics score moderately. Products burning cash with no revenue, no paying users, and no clear path to revenue score lowest. For bootstrapped founders, the sustainability of cash burn matters more than the absolute amount: burning $100/month on a side project with growing free users is sustainable, while burning $2,000/month on a product with no users is not, regardless of how much savings you have. The calculator cross-references your economics with your traction to identify whether spending is producing results.
- Evaluate your market position: how many direct competitors you have, your main distribution channel (organic search, paid acquisition, a community, or none yet), and how different your product really is. In the score, having any channel earns 30 of the 100 market points, an organic or community channel 10 more, fewer than 3 competitors 20, and a unique product 30 (a better experience 20, a clone minus 10); the market dimension is 15% of the total. With no distribution plan the market score cannot pass 50, however different the product is. The weighting follows Peter Thiel's argument in Zero to One that poor sales, rather than a bad product, is the most common cause of failure; it is an argument from experience, not a measured result.
- Read your verdict (SHIP, ITERATE, or KILL), the composite score from 0-100, the per-dimension breakdown showing which areas are strong and which are weak, and the three recommended next steps tailored to your specific situation. SHIP (score 70-100) means the signals support scaling effort and investment. ITERATE (score 40-69) means there are some positive signals but focused experiments are needed before committing further. KILL (score 0-39) means the evidence does not support continued investment in the current form. Focus your energy on your weakest scoring dimension first, because that dimension is the constraint limiting overall viability. A product with excellent traction but terrible economics needs pricing work, not more features. A product with good economics but zero traction needs distribution, not optimization. The recommended next steps are prioritized based on which dimension drags the composite score down most.
Questions people usually ask
How does the Ship-or-Kill scoring methodology work?
The tool evaluates your project across five weighted dimensions: Traction (35%) measures paying customers, revenue, active users, and growth rate. Economics (20%) assesses cost structure, revenue trajectory, and path to profitability. Momentum (15%) evaluates growth trend direction and consistency. Efficiency (15%) examines output relative to time invested, penalizing sunk-cost patterns. Market (15%) evaluates competitive landscape, differentiation, and distribution channel strength. Each dimension scores 0-100 independently, then a weighted composite score determines the verdict: SHIP (70-100) means signals support scaling, ITERATE (40-69) means focused experiments are needed, KILL (0-39) means evidence does not support continued investment.
Why is traction weighted at 35% while everything else is lower?
Traction is weighted highest because paying customers are the most direct evidence of product-market fit, and lack of market need is the most cited reason in startup post-mortems. The weights are an editorial judgement, not a fitted model. No amount of elegant architecture, clever marketing, or efficient development compensates for building something people do not want to pay for. A single paying customer provides more signal than months of building because it proves someone values your product enough to exchange money for it. The scoring reflects this reality: a project with strong traction but weak economics can fix pricing, but a project with great economics and zero traction may have a fundamental product-market fit problem.
What does an ITERATE verdict actually mean in practice?
ITERATE (score 40-69) means there are some positive signals but the evidence is not strong enough to justify going all-in with significant time, money, or career risk. Practically, this means: set a 30-day checkpoint with specific, measurable goals (e.g., reach 10 paying customers, achieve 5% weekly growth, validate a distribution channel). Run 2-3 focused experiments targeting your weakest scoring dimension. Limit time investment to 10-15 hours per week rather than full-time commitment. The most common ITERATE pattern is a product that has free users or interest but has not converted that interest into paying customers, which requires pricing experiments, direct user conversations, and distribution testing before a SHIP-or-KILL decision.
When should I KILL a project even if I believe in the idea?
Strong kill signals include: zero paying customers after 3+ months of availability (the market has spoken), negative or flat growth for 6+ consecutive weeks after launch (no organic momentum), cost to acquire customers exceeds their lifetime value with no clear path to improvement, and the project requires more hours per week than you can sustain. The hardest kills are projects where you have invested significant time and emotional energy. The sunk-cost effect is well documented in decision research: people overweight what they have already invested when deciding what to do next. The KILL verdict is designed to surface this pattern objectively. If you find yourself arguing against the score, ask whether you would start this project today knowing what you know now.
Does this framework work for non-SaaS products?
Yes. The scoring framework applies to any product, side project, or business initiative where you can measure customers, revenue, costs, and growth. This includes digital products (courses, templates, tools), mobile apps, physical products, service businesses, and content businesses. The inputs are universal: how many people pay you, how much revenue you generate, how much it costs to operate, how fast you are growing, and how you acquire customers. For non-SaaS products, interpret MRR as average monthly revenue and adjust customer acquisition context accordingly. The framework is deliberately model-agnostic because the fundamentals of traction, economics, and market position apply to any commercial venture.
How should I interpret the per-dimension breakdown?
The dimension breakdown reveals where your project is strong and where it is constrained. Focus on your weakest dimension first because it is your bottleneck. Common patterns: high traction with low economics means you have demand but your pricing or cost structure needs work. High economics with low traction means your model works on paper but you have not found product-market fit or distribution. High efficiency with low market means you are building well but in a crowded space without differentiation. The recommended next steps are always prioritized based on which dimension drags the composite score down most, because improving a score from 20 to 50 in one dimension has more impact than improving from 70 to 80 in another.
What if I disagree with the verdict?
The score is directional, not prescriptive. If you have strong contextual information the tool cannot capture (insider knowledge, pending enterprise contracts, a distribution partnership about to launch), that context legitimately matters. However, the most common reason founders disagree with a low score is that the numbers are uncomfortable, which is exactly the pattern the tool is designed to surface. Ask yourself: if a friend showed you these exact numbers for their project, would you advise them to continue? External perspective often reveals what internal attachment obscures. If after honest reflection you still disagree, document the specific thesis for why the score is wrong and set a 30-day checkpoint to test it with measurable goals.
How often should I re-evaluate my ship-or-kill score?
Re-evaluate monthly during active building, after any significant milestone (first paying customer, first $1K MRR, launch on Product Hunt or Hacker News), and at the end of any focused experiment period. Tracking your score over time is more valuable than any single evaluation because the trend reveals trajectory: a score that improves from 35 to 55 over 3 months shows the right direction even if the current verdict is still ITERATE. A score that stays flat at 45 for 3 months despite active effort is a stronger kill signal than a single reading of 39.
Is this tool free and private?
Yes. All calculations run entirely in your browser. No data is sent anywhere. No signup or account required.
Is this professional business advice?
No. The Ship-or-Kill framework provides a structured, quantitative assessment based on the inputs you provide. It does not capture qualitative factors like team dynamics, market timing, or domain expertise that legitimately influence product decisions. Use the score as one input alongside your own judgment, customer conversations, and trusted advisor feedback.
Related calculators
- Make the call Build vs Buy Decision Engine
Compare building infrastructure yourself versus buying managed services with per-component build/buy verdicts.
- Make the call One-Person SaaS Valuation
Estimate what your solo SaaS is worth using indie/micro-SaaS multiples with key valuation factors.
- Make the call LLM Vendor Lock-In Cost
Engineering, downtime, and payback when migrating between LLM providers.
- Make the call Pricing Model Picker
Flat monthly, per-seat, usage-based, or hybrid? Compare projected revenue side-by-side.
Articles
- 14 min read Build vs Buy in 2026: When the LLM API Kills Your Moat
Build vs buy in 2026: which AI product features survive when Anthropic and OpenAI ship the same thing, and why distribution moats outlast a model wrapper.
More in Bootstrapped growth
See when cash runs out, what you need to break even, and how to grow without funding.
- Startup Runway Calculator
- Monthly Burn Rate Calculator
- Break-Even Units Calculator
- Sales Forecast Calculator
Use it from code
The same calculation as a JavaScript module you can import. It runs where you import it, with no request, key or rate limit.
import { compute } from "https://aibizhub.io/engines/ship-or-kill-score.js";Input and output contract, TypeScript types and the guide for agents.