Revenue Modeling: Bottoms-Up vs. Top-Down Approaches
Revenue is the most scrutinized line in any financial model. How you build it determines whether investors trust your projections or dismiss them as fantasy.
Revenue modeling isn't about predicting the future—it's about making your assumptions explicit and testable. As part of your comprehensive financial model, the revenue build is often the most scrutinized component. The best revenue models don't just forecast numbers; they reveal the operational levers that drive growth.
There are two fundamental approaches: bottoms-up (building from unit drivers) and top-down (working from market size down). Neither is inherently better. The right choice depends on your stage, data availability, and audience. A fractional CFO can help you build models that investors find credible.
The Golden Rule
A credible revenue model can be challenged on assumptions but not on logic. Every number should trace back to a driver that someone in the organization can influence.
Bottoms-Up Revenue Modeling
Bottoms-up modeling builds revenue from unit-level drivers: customers, transactions, users, deals. It's grounded in operational reality and directly tied to activities your team controls.
When to Use Bottoms-Up
Bottoms-Up Framework by Model
SaaS / Subscription
Revenue = Beginning MRR + New MRR - Churned MRR + Expansion MRR
Key drivers: New customer count, average contract value, churn rate, expansion rate, sales cycle length. See our SaaS financial model guide for the complete template.
Transactional / E-commerce
Revenue = Traffic × Conversion Rate × Average Order Value × Purchase Frequency
Key drivers: Traffic sources, conversion by channel, AOV trends, repeat purchase rate
Marketplace
Revenue = GMV × Take Rate
Key drivers: Buyer count, seller count, transactions per user, average transaction size, take rate by category. Learn more in our marketplace model guide.
Professional Services
Revenue = Billable FTEs × Utilization Rate × Hours × Bill Rate
Key drivers: Headcount plan, utilization targets, rate card, project mix
Example: SaaS Bottoms-Up Build
| Driver | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beginning Customers | 100 | 115 | 135 | 160 |
| + New Customers | 20 | 25 | 30 | 35 |
| - Churned (5%) | (5) | (5) | (5) | (5) |
| = Ending Customers | 115 | 135 | 160 | 190 |
| × Avg ACV ($K) | $24 | $25 | $26 | $27 |
| = ARR ($M) | $2.76M | $3.38M | $4.16M | $5.13M |
Top-Down Revenue Modeling
Top-down modeling starts with total addressable market (TAM) and works down to your expected share. It's useful for sanity-checking bottoms-up projections and for early-stage companies without historical data.
When to Use Top-Down
TAM → SAM → SOM Framework
TAM (Total Addressable Market)
Total revenue opportunity if you had 100% market share with all possible customers.
Example: $50B global spend on marketing software
SAM (Serviceable Addressable Market)
Portion of TAM you can actually serve given your product, geography, and go-to-market.
Example: $8B mid-market marketing software in North America
SOM (Serviceable Obtainable Market)
Realistic share you can capture given competition and resources.
Example: $200M (2.5% of SAM) in 5 years
Top-Down Calculation Methods
Market Share Approach
Estimate market size × realistic share capture. Good for established markets with clear sizing data.
Comparable Growth Approach
Apply growth rates from similar companies at your stage. Useful when comps are available.
Top-Down Trap
"We just need 1% of a $10B market" is a red flag. It ignores the cost and difficulty of capturing even small market share. Top-down models are credibility checks, not forecasting tools.
Combining Both Approaches
The most credible models use both approaches: bottoms-up for the forecast, top-down for validation. When they diverge significantly, investigate why.
Triangulation Framework
Build Your Forecast
- Create detailed bottoms-up model
- Project 3-5 years forward
- Calculate implied market share
Validate With Top-Down
- Size your TAM/SAM/SOM
- Compare implied share to comps
- Adjust if wildly different
What Divergence Means
| Scenario | Likely Issue | Action |
|---|---|---|
| Bottoms-up implies >10% market share | Overly aggressive unit assumptions | Stress-test conversion, churn, expansion |
| Bottoms-up implies <0.5% market share | Conservative or constrained GTM | Consider scaling sales/marketing investment |
| Top-down growth > bottoms-up | Market opportunity not fully captured | Identify new channels or products |
Identifying Revenue Drivers
Good revenue models are built on drivers that are measurable, controllable, and leading indicators of performance.
Driver Categories
Volume Drivers
- New customers acquired
- Traffic/leads generated
- Sales qualified opportunities
- Active users
Value Drivers
- Average contract value
- Average order value
- Revenue per user
- Price per unit
Conversion Drivers
- Lead-to-customer rate
- Trial-to-paid conversion
- Win rate
- Sales cycle length
Retention Drivers
- Gross churn rate
- Net revenue retention
- Expansion rate
- Customer lifetime
Common Mistakes to Avoid
Assuming Linear Scaling
Doubling sales headcount doesn't double revenue immediately. Account for ramp time, market saturation, and diminishing returns.
Ignoring Seasonality
Many businesses have seasonal patterns. Use monthly or quarterly modeling to capture these effects accurately.
Static Churn Assumptions
Churn often improves as you move upmarket or degrades as early customers age. Model cohort-based churn when possible.
Disconnecting Revenue from Costs
Revenue growth requires investment. Ensure your GTM spend, headcount, and infrastructure costs scale appropriately with revenue assumptions. For more pitfalls to avoid, see common modeling mistakes.
Need Help With Revenue Modeling?
Eagle Rock CFO builds revenue models that investors trust. Let us help you quantify your growth story.
Get Started