What to do first

These changes move the grade, in order of effect. Each one cites the check it addresses, and those checks are described under “Each check” below.

1. Assign an owner to $39.2M of ARR. 3,525 active accounts have no rep. The top rep holds 25.3% of ARR. The least-covered tag field is parent. Owner coverage drives both the segmentation score and the rep concentration result. This moves Multi-Dimensional Insights toward B.
2. Put returning customers back on their original key. The file has 5,598 flagged rows. Each is a customer who came back under a new account record instead of the one they had before. Linking them back makes reactivation and cohort retention readable. This moves Cohort-Centric Design up.
3. Add a definitions tab. Write one line each for ARR, NRR, GRR, churn, new, expansion, reactivation and cohort. With written definitions, anyone can reproduce the KPI table from the same words the summary uses. This lifts the result for “The words in the definitions were written down” (CP-07).
4. Normalize 2 tag fields. 2 fields carry case or whitespace variants of the same value. One pass of normalization removes them. This moves Multi-Dimensional Insights up one band.
5. Send the inputs we could not use. Export tags as of each month, not once per account. Also add a units-or-price table or a payments table. With those in hand, segment stability can be graded, and the diligence view has the inputs it needs.

Where the grade comes from

Inputs: 2 file(s), 8 sheet(s), 1,481,159 rows. No hazards needed handling. Checks run: 39 of 41. The 2 that could not run are listed below.

• Unified, Finance-Approved Foundation: 87.3 (B+)
• Audit-Grade Accuracy: 100 (A+)
• Cohort-Centric Design: 85.7 (B)
• Multi-Dimensional Insights: 77.5 (B-)
• Anomalies: 100 (A+)

Audit-Grade Accuracy and Anomalies came through without a finding. The grade below A+ comes from ownership, returning-customer keys, definitions and tag hygiene. None of it comes from the arithmetic.

Each check

Each item below is one piece of the rubric. The words are the check. The short code is the citation.

Unified, Finance-Approved Foundation

Bookings with no product or no owner

Unified, Finance-Approved Foundation. Cited as CP-05, owner.

Measures how much of the latest book has no product, and how much has no owner.

In this file, 3,525 accounts carry no owner, which is 24.8% of the book. 0% of the book has no product. Check score 30.

A buyer would ask: who is accountable for renewing and expanding the unowned accounts?

Next step. Assign a product and an owner to the unassigned book before the next export.

The words in the definitions were written down

Unified, Finance-Approved Foundation. Cited as CP-07.

Looks for the standard terms in the definitions text. It does not test whether those words match the numbers.

In this file, 5 of the 9 standard terms are defined. Check score 56.

A buyer would ask: how are GRR, new, reactivation and MRR defined, and would two analysts compute them the same way?

Next step. Write a short definition for each headline term the summary uses, in the same words the rubric expects.

Came through clean: Enough history to follow a customer (CP-01); Months where the whole book went quiet (CP-02); A customer goes quiet without a churn mark (CP-03); Revenue with no customer behind it (CP-04); the product half of Bookings with no product or no owner (CP-05, product); The product file covers the same months as billing (CP-06); Billed customers appear on the customer list (CP-08).

Audit-Grade Accuracy

Came through clean: The bridge foots on its own (CR-01); Customer detail matches the bridge ending (CR-02); Movements rebuild from the customer rows (CR-03); Product lines tie to billing (CR-04); The amount matches the status word (CR-05); Statuses tell a legal story over time (CR-06); Headline KPIs can be reproduced (CR-07); The bridge and the KPI table agree (CR-08); Product and segment totals add up (CR-09); Duplicate dollars that break the tie (CR-10).

Cohort-Centric Design

A returning customer kept the same key

Cohort-Centric Design. Cited as CO-04.

Splits reactivations that kept the same account key from new keys whose name matches an account that churned recently.

In this file, there are 5,598 reactivations. 0 of them kept the original key (0%). Check score 0.

A buyer would ask: if a returning customer looks like a new logo, how much of new-customer growth is really customers coming back, and how much past churn was really a pause?

Next step. Reuse the original account key when a customer comes back, instead of opening a new record.

Came through clean: Customers have a start date (CO-01); The start date matches the first revenue month (CO-02); Too many customers share one start month (CO-03); Contract end dates exist and fall after the start (CO-05); Retention looks earned, not just unexpired (CO-06); A trailing year has a year of history behind it (CO-07).

Multi-Dimensional Insights

One owner does not hold the book

Multi-Dimensional Insights. Cited as SG-06.

Measures the top owner’s share of the latest book and the share with no owner.

In this file, the book is spread across 3 reps. The largest holds $40.0M, a 25.3% share. Check score 30.

A buyer would ask: with the largest rep and the unowned book each near a quarter of ARR, how exposed are renewals to coverage gaps?

Next step. Reassign concentrated accounts and fill the unassigned ones so the book is not one rep’s.

Those tags actually cover the book

Multi-Dimensional Insights. Cited as SG-02.

For each tag, measures how much of the latest book sits on accounts with a real value.

In this file, the 6 tag fields cover 79.2% of the book on average. Check score 55.

A buyer would ask: can the book be cut by parent account and by owner, or only by product, region and segment?

Next step. Fill the blank tags on the accounts that carry the book, starting with product and owner.

The same idea is spelled one way

Multi-Dimensional Insights. Cited as SG-04.

Groups tag values that match once case and spacing are removed, and scores how many spellings each idea has.

In this file, 2 tag fields carry more than one spelling of the same value. Check score 80.

A buyer would ask: does a segment or status filter return the whole group, or only the rows spelled one way?

Next step. Pick one spelling for each category and apply it across the file.

Came through clean: The cuts a buyer expects are present (SG-01); A tag is a category, not free text (SG-03); Parent accounts are used (SG-05).

Anomalies

Came through clean: One customer spikes for a month and reverts (AN-01); A customer drops to zero and comes back unmarked (AN-02); One month moves the whole book (AN-03); Amounts do not match the file’s own format (AN-05); Duplicate rows (AN-06); The book sits in a few customers (AN-07); Prices did not move where an escalator was promised (AN-08); A sentence in the talking points does not match the file (AN-09).

What we could not check

• A new product line copies a price the account already had (AN-04). No month moved the whole book, so there was nothing for this check to examine.
• Tags stay stable over the year (SG-07). The file stores one tag per account rather than one per month, so changes over time cannot be seen.

How this was graded

Weights: Unified, Finance-Approved Foundation 25%, Audit-Grade Accuracy 30%, Cohort-Centric Design 15%, Multi-Dimensional Insights 15%, Anomalies 15%. Bands: A ≥ 90, B ≥ 75, C ≥ 60, D ≥ 45. Bridge convention detected: monthly sum. Rules version caeb8e512330. Lenses: decision-ready not yet, diligence-ready no, AI-ready yes.

Next step

The Strategic Revenue Intelligence Assessment walks through these findings with a FinQore analyst. It shows what a decision-ready and diligence-ready cube looks like for your business. Your files are retained in FinQore infrastructure for the stated retention period and deleted on request.