# SaaS Growth Benchmarks: 23 Metrics, and What Is Guessed

> Every benchmark table on the internet presents all its cells with equal confidence. This one tells you which ones are estimates.

- Author: Rishikesh Ranjan · Published: Aug 8, 2026 · Updated: Aug 8, 2026
- Type: Playbook
- Tags: Metrics, Resources, Frameworks
- Growth levers: Retention (primary), also Acquisition, Activation, Revenue
- ~915 words

---

This is every benchmark behind the 23 calculators on this site, in one table: the median, good and great figure for B2B SaaS on each metric, and the **one thing benchmark tables never tell you**, which is which of the numbers are actually sourced and which are informed estimates.

That distinction is the point. Each calculator holds 21 cells, seven industries by three tiers, and not all 483 of them come from a published by-industry study, because for most metrics no such study exists at that granularity. Eighteen of the 23 metrics have at least one industry row that is a conservative estimate. Every table you will find elsewhere contains the same kind of gap and presents it in the same typeface as the sourced cells.

> **How to read the last column:** "All 7 sourced" means every industry row traces to a named study. "Estimated for N of 7" means N industry rows are conservative estimates derived from adjacent data rather than a by-industry source. The SaaS row shown here is sourced on all 23 metrics; the estimate count refers to the other industries inside each calculator.

## The 23 benchmarks, B2B SaaS

| Metric | Median | Good | Great | Unit | By-industry sourcing |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Activation Rate | 37 | 50 | 64 | Activation rate (%) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| ARPU | 100 | 210 | 500 | Monthly ARPU ($) | all 7 sourced |
| ARR | 30 | 60 | 100 | YoY ARR growth (%) | all 7 sourced |
| CAC | 900 | 450 | 200 | Blended CAC ($) | estimated for 1 of 7 |
| CAC Payback Period | 15 | 10 | 6 | Healthy payback (months) | estimated for 3 of 7 |
| Churn Rate | 3.8 | 2 | 1 | Monthly churn (%) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| Conversion Rate | 3.8 | 6 | 11.6 | Visitor to signup (%) | all 7 sourced |
| Cost Per Lead | 237 | 160 | 110 | Blended cost per lead ($) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| DAU / Stickiness | 31 | 38 | 50 | DAU/MAU stickiness (%) | estimated for 3 of 7 |
| Engagement Rate | 25 | 35 | 48 | Engagement rate (%) | estimated for 3 of 7 |
| Feature Adoption Rate | 16.5 | 30 | 45 | Feature adoption (%) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| Freemium Conversion | 3 | 5 | 10 | Free to paid (%) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| LTV | 2100 | 3200 | 5000 | Gross-profit LTV ($) | estimated for 1 of 7 |
| LTV:CAC Ratio | 3.2 | 5 | 7 | LTV:CAC (x:1) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| MAU Growth | 3 | 6 | 10 | MoM MAU growth (%) | estimated for 3 of 7 |
| MRR | 2.5 | 4 | 6 | MoM MRR growth (%) | all 7 sourced |
| Net Revenue Retention | 102 | 112 | 125 | Net revenue retention (%) | estimated for 3 of 7 |
| NPS | 36 | 50 | 65 | NPS (-100 to 100) | estimated for 3 of 7 |
| Onboarding Completion | 50 | 65 | 80 | Onboarding completion (%) | all 7 sourced |
| PQL Rate | 10 | 18 | 28 | PQL rate (%) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| Retention Rate | 85 | 90 | 95 | Annual logo retention (%) | estimated for 1 of 7 |
| Time to Value | 1.5 | 0.5 | 0.1 | Time to first value (days) | estimated for 2 of 7 |
| Traffic to Customers | 0.7 | 1.5 | 2.8 | Visitor to customer (%) | estimated for 3 of 7 |

Five of these read backwards, where a lower number is the better one: **CAC, CAC Payback Period, Churn Rate, Cost Per Lead, Time to Value.** On those rows the "great" column is the smallest figure, not the largest, which is the most common way a benchmark table gets misread.

## Why a median is the least useful number here

A median across SaaS blends businesses whose economics have almost nothing in common. The spread by vertical is routinely wider than the gap between median and great, which means a company comparing itself to the blended median can conclude it is average when it is either in trouble or well ahead. Each calculator carries its own by-industry table for that reason, and the industry row is the one worth reading.

The same caution applies to the absolute-value metrics. CAC, LTV, cost per lead and ARPU are dollar figures that scale with contract size, so they travel badly between an enterprise vendor and a self-serve product. The ratios travel; the dollars do not. That is the same reason [customer retention cost has no industry benchmark](https://www.productgrowth.blog/p/customer-retention-cost) at all.

## Where these numbers come from

Roughly 50 named sources, cited per metric rather than in a bibliography, including SaaS Capital's private B2B survey, ChartMogul, Recurly's subscription network, ICONIQ Growth, First Page Sage, RevenueCat, Benchmarkit and Kyle Poyar's Growth Unhinged reports. Each calculator page prints its own source line under the benchmark table, so a figure can be traced without leaving the site.

Two of those sources have already gone offline since the calculators were built, which is the ordinary fate of benchmark reports and the reason the source line names the report rather than relying on a link surviving. The figures on this page are checked against the calculators automatically, so if a benchmark is revised and this table is not, the build fails rather than the page quietly going stale.

> **Steal this:** When you are handed a benchmark, ask which cell of the table your business actually sits in and whether that specific cell was measured or inferred. Most benchmark decks cannot answer the second question, and the ones that can are usually quoting a median across companies that have nothing to do with yours.

## FAQ: SaaS growth benchmarks

#### What is a good benchmark for SaaS growth metrics?

It depends on the metric and far more on your industry than on any blended SaaS median. The table above gives a median, good and great figure for 23 metrics in B2B SaaS, but the spread between verticals is often wider than the gap between median and great, so a company matching the blended median can still be well behind its own segment. Read your industry row on the individual calculator rather than the headline figure, and remember that five of these metrics read backwards, where lower is better.

#### Are these SaaS benchmarks sourced or estimated?

Both, and the table says which. Every B2B SaaS figure shown here traces to a named published source. Inside each calculator there are seven industry rows, and for 18 of the 23 metrics at least one of those rows is a conservative estimate derived from adjacent data rather than a by-industry study, because no such study exists at that granularity. The last column reports how many rows are estimated per metric, which is the disclosure most benchmark tables leave out.

#### Why do benchmark dollar figures like CAC and LTV vary so much?

Because they are absolute values that scale with contract size. An enterprise vendor selling six-figure contracts and a self-serve product at $9 a month can run equally healthy businesses and report CAC figures orders of magnitude apart, so a median across them describes nothing. Ratios such as LTV:CAC, payback period and retention percentage travel between business models; raw dollar amounts do not.

#### How often do these benchmarks change?

The underlying reports are typically annual, and the figures here are re-verified whenever a calculator is revised. Benchmark sources also disappear: two cited when these calculators were built are already offline, which is why each source line names the report and publisher rather than depending on a URL surviving. This page is checked against the calculators automatically, so it cannot drift out of step with them.

Every metric above has its own page with the formula, a worked example and the full by-industry table. They are indexed on the [calculators](https://www.productgrowth.blog/calculators) page.

---

All posts: https://www.productgrowth.blog/archive · Site: https://www.productgrowth.blog