Report examples · Synthetic data
Inspect a completed, synthetic four-account review: evidence coverage, weighted wallet share, opportunity decisions and a buyer-ready next-step register.
Synthetic completed deliverable. Review ID DEMO-GROWTH-01; review date October 6, 2026; measurement period the 12 months ended September 30, 2026; amounts in USD. This is a fictional commercial review, with a deliberately unresolved account and an explicitly estimated denominator. It is not a customer case study or a claim about automatic software output.
Approve a ten-hour validation and proposal effort for DEMO-B. Hold DEMO-A until additional selling capacity is approved, validate DEMO-C's category-spend estimate before allocating pursuit effort, and ask DEMO-D for its in-scope spend declaration. The decision owner in this example is the commercial manager; the review is approved subject to those evidence conditions.
The book has $300,000 of revenue. Accounts with usable category-spend evidence contribute $270,000 of that revenue and $850,000 of wallet, giving a weighted share of 31.8%. Evidence coverage is 90% of book revenue. Customer-stated evidence covers 70%, inferred evidence 20%, and unavailable evidence 10%. Those figures describe different questions and appear separately throughout the pack.
The existing share of wallet versus market share guide owns the distinction between customer-category spend and the whole market. This report includes no external market denominator and makes no market-share claim.
The agreed scope is one fictional maintenance-parts category, net invoiced sales after credits, matched to customer spend for the same 12-month period. Each account ID is the agreed economic buying unit. Broader parent-company spend, labor services and tax are excluded from both sides. Evidence references below are fictional labels, not links to customer documents.
| Account | Our revenue | Category spend | Evidence | Source date | Share | Measured gap |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DEMO-A | $120,000 | $400,000 | Stated; DEMO-DECL-A | Sep 30, 2026 | 30.0% | $280,000 |
| DEMO-B | $90,000 | $150,000 | Stated; DEMO-DECL-B | Sep 30, 2026 | 60.0% | $60,000 |
| DEMO-C | $60,000 | $300,000 | Inferred; DEMO-MODEL-C | Sep 25, 2026 | 20.0% | $240,000 |
| DEMO-D | $30,000 | Unavailable | No usable declaration | Unavailable | Unavailable | Unavailable |
| Usable-evidence cohort | $270,000 | $850,000 | Three accounts | 31.8% | $580,000 |
Arithmetic checks: $120,000 + $90,000 + $60,000 + $30,000 = $300,000 book revenue. Usable-evidence revenue is $270,000, and $270,000 ÷ $300,000 = 90% coverage. The weighted share is $270,000 ÷ $850,000 = 31.7647%; the simple average of the three displayed shares is 36.6667% and is not used as book share. The gap check is $850,000 − $270,000 = $580,000.
Build a similar evidence record with the customer category-spend declaration, category-scope register and share-of-wallet workbook. Keep unknown denominators visibly unavailable.
DEMO-C's $300,000 denominator is the base case of an illustrative $180,000–$420,000 range. Its own share ranges from 33.3% at the lower spend estimate to 14.3% at the upper estimate. Holding the other two wallets fixed, usable-cohort share ranges from 37.0% ($270,000 ÷ $730,000) to 27.8% ($270,000 ÷ $970,000). That is a sensitivity range, not a statistical confidence interval.
| Exception | Review outcome | Effect on decision |
|---|---|---|
| DEMO-C estimate has not been checked against declared spend | Evidence review required | No pursuit approval based solely on its $240,000 gap |
| DEMO-D denominator is absent | Ask customer for scoped period spend | Retain revenue in coverage; exclude from known-wallet share |
| Buying-unit scope could differ from billing hierarchy | Scope owner must confirm IDs before repeat run | Do not roll parent spend into site revenue |
For the method behind these checks, use wallet-estimate sensitivity and revenue-weighted evidence coverage. The sample is intentionally small; it demonstrates reconciliation, not representativeness across an industry.
The commercial team has ten approved pursuit hours available in this example. Customer spend alone does not allocate those hours. Each proposed amount below is a separate, synthetic seller judgment within the measured gap; none is inferred from the gap automatically.
| Account | Candidate annual revenue | Contribution rate assumption | Contribution if won | Effort estimate | Disposition |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DEMO-A | $80,000 | 25% | $20,000 | 30 hours | Hold: exceeds available effort |
| DEMO-B | $25,000 | 35% | $8,750 | 10 hours | Approve validation and proposal |
| DEMO-C | $60,000 | 20% | $12,000 | 20 hours | Evidence validation first |
| DEMO-D | Unavailable | Unavailable | Unavailable | 2 evidence hours | Request denominator; no revenue forecast |
The three contribution figures are conditional on winning the full stated candidate revenue. They are not expected value or realized benefit. Existing products, procurement access, renewal timing and delivery capacity still require confirmation. The ten approved pursuit hours do not include the separately assigned two evidence hours for DEMO-D.
DEMO-B is selected because the example manager has confirmed category eligibility, assigned an owner and allocated the required hours. The biggest wallet gap is not automatically the best next action. See prioritizing gaps after margin and capacity for that decision method.
| Action | Account | Responsible role | Due date | Evidence of completion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Confirm category access and submit scoped proposal | DEMO-B | Account lead | Oct 20, 2026 | Eligibility note, proposal and hours used |
| Validate wallet estimate with stated period spend | DEMO-C | Commercial analyst | Oct 16, 2026 | Reconciled declaration or explicit unresolved flag |
| Request spend declaration for the agreed category | DEMO-D | Account lead | Oct 16, 2026 | Declaration or recorded customer decline |
| Review incremental selling capacity | DEMO-A | Commercial manager | Oct 23, 2026 | Approved hours or documented deferral |
At the next review, record actions completed, actual proposal value and realized incremental contribution separately. Compare the original assumptions with results using an account-growth experiment where a defensible comparison group exists.
A review should hand over reconciled account rows, evidence labels and dates, unknown-denominator coverage, estimate sensitivity and a decision register that distinguishes measured gaps from approved pursuits. The report download contains this completed example; the CSV contains its four supporting account rows. Replace synthetic data only after scope and evidence rules are agreed.
To discuss a scoped review, contact Covirage with your decision, category, available exports and evidence gaps. Agree deliverables and acceptance using the analytics statement-of-work template. This example is an inspectable output specification, not a promise that every view is available from any uploaded file.
No. All IDs, revenue, category-spend figures, judgments and decisions are synthetic. The example shows a review structure and the checks a buyer can request.
Its denominator is missing, so its share is unavailable. Its $30,000 revenue stays in total book revenue and in the coverage calculation, but not in the known-wallet share denominator.
No. It is the difference between in-scope category spend and our revenue across three accounts with usable evidence. Eligibility, competitors, timing and selling capacity can make much of that gap unavailable.