How we score ideas

The measured metrics and the exact formula behind the Opportunity Score.

Four signals, one number

Every published idea carries an Opportunity Score from 0 to 100. It is a weighted blend of four signals: market size counts 30%, momentum 25%, competition 25% and build effort 20%. Each signal carries a written justification and a source type you can inspect on the idea page.

Measured, not asserted

Each signal is itself computed from measured sub-metrics, every one with its own justification and source. The weights below are the exact constants our scoring engine uses; a dossier's numbers must reproduce from its metrics or it does not pass review. Ideas researched before this system carry the four signals only, and are re-scored as they move through re-research.

Market size (30%)

Built from market size evidence (40%), willingness to pay (35%) and audience reachability (25%). We size the smallest honest market the idea can win, not the industry it belongs to. A tool for Shopify dispute handling is scored against merchant dispute spend, not "all of e-commerce". Conservative beats impressive.

Momentum (25%)

Built from search trend (30%), hiring signals (25%), community pulse (25%) and funding activity (20%). Momentum asks whether the wind blows toward or against the idea. It is the signal we re-check most often after publishing.

Competition (25%)

Built from market openness (40%), the incumbent review gap (35%) and moat potential (25%). A high competition score means room: incumbents are absent, asleep or structurally unable to follow. Named player types and the specific gap are listed in every breakdown.

Build effort (20%)

Built from build ease (35%), time to MVP (25%), regulatory ease (20%) and capital lightness (20%) - all oriented so that easier, faster, lighter scores higher. A regulated money-movement product scores low even when the market is huge. The signal assumes a small, competent team.

What the score is not

It is not a prediction and not a promise. Two founders can take the same 80 and produce opposite outcomes. The score exists to rank research quality-adjusted opportunities, so your attention lands where evidence is strongest.