Blog · Forecast and pipeline · Sales teams
The honest answer to what B2B sales win rate a team should have: the 20 to 30 percent figures usually quoted depend entirely on the stage the rate is measured from, whether it is counted by deals or by value, and what happens to deals that never close. This page gives the ranges by stage and desk, the three measurable things that set the right figure for one team, and the table to compute before anyone quotes a percentage.
Win rate is won over decided, and the useful question is decided from where, by what, and with what done about the undecided. This page answers those three.
| Measured from | Typical B2B range | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Lead or first meeting | 5 to 15 percent | Mostly a qualification rate |
| Qualified opportunity | 15 to 30 percent | The usual quoted figure |
| Proposal or quote sent | 35 to 55 percent | Quote conversion on a distribution desk |
| Final shortlist, verbal | 50 to 70 percent | Late-stage forecast accuracy |
| Renewal | 80 to 95 percent | A different measure with its own page |
By desk, from qualified opportunity: enterprise software 15 to 25 percent, mid-market 20 to 30, industrial distribution quotes 30 to 50, consulting proposals 25 to 40, insurance broking new business 20 to 35, construction tenders 10 to 25.
Win rate from stage S = deals won ÷ (deals won + deals lost) among deals that reached stage S
The same one hundred opportunities:
| Stage reached | Deals | Won | Lost | Win rate from here |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Qualified | 100 | 22 | 78 | 22% |
| Proposal | 50 | 22 | 28 | 44% |
| Shortlist | 32 | 22 | 10 | 69% |
Three correct rates. The team's report should say which, and the same one every period.
| Basis | Won | Decided | Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| Count | 22 | 100 | 22% |
| Value | $1,900,000 | $12,000,000 | 16% |
Large deals lose more often. A team with a 22 percent count rate and a 16 percent value rate needs value-weighted coverage, and the pipeline coverage benchmark uses the value figure.
A pipeline where losses are never marked reports a win rate on the deals someone bothered to close. The rule: a deal past a stated multiple of the stage's normal age, with no activity in a stated window, is counted as lost for the rate, whatever its status says.
| Status | Deals | Counted as |
|---|---|---|
| Won | 22 | Won |
| Lost | 60 | Lost |
| Open, within age norm | 30 | Not yet decided |
| Open, past 2× age norm, no activity 60 days | 18 | Lost for the rate |
Win rate on marked outcomes: 22 of 82, 27 percent. With the stalled eighteen: 22 of 100, 22 percent. The second is the one the forecast should use.
| Measure | Formula | From |
|---|---|---|
| Win rate from stage, count | Won ÷ decided among deals reaching stage | CRM deals |
| Win rate from stage, value | Same, value-weighted | CRM deals |
| Stalled rule | Age > 2× stage norm and no activity in 60 days | CRM activity |
| Rate with stalled as lost | Won ÷ (decided + stalled) | Above |
| Same, prior four quarters | Same, trailing | CRM |
| Opportunity count and pipeline value beside it | Created per quarter; open value | CRM |
The forecast bias worked example shows what a wrong win rate does to the forecast, and the size-weighted hit ratio piece covers the same count-versus-value problem on a trading desk.
Stage unstated. Forty-four percent compared to a benchmark of twenty-two, and the team congratulated.
Count only. The largest deals lost, the rate unmoved.
Losses never marked. Sixty percent, on the deals that were closed.
Rate up, pipeline down. Better qualification, or a team that stopped prospecting; the count says which.
A good win rate is one measured from a stated stage, by count and by value, with stalled deals counted as lost, at or above the team's own prior year, with opportunity creation steady beside it. For most B2B teams that is 15 to 30 percent from qualified opportunity, and the figure for one team is on one table from its own CRM. Covirage computes it from the deal export each week with the stage, the basis and the stalled rule stated on the page.
Because they are measured from different stages and count different things. A vendor quoting 47 percent is measuring from proposal; a team measuring from first meeting sees 18 on the same deals. Neither is wrong. Comparing them is.
Usage varies, and the difference is the denominator. Win rate is usually won over won plus lost; close rate is often won over all opportunities created, including those still open or abandoned. The first flatters a team that never marks losses; the second penalises a team with a long cycle. State which, and compute both.
Only if the pipeline stays the same. A win rate rises when a team qualifies harder and creates fewer opportunities; that can be good, or it can be a team that stopped prospecting. Win rate beside opportunity count and pipeline value is the read; win rate alone is not.