The 95/5 Rule, popularised by Professor John Dawes at the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute, is one of the most influential ideas in B2B marketing. It made a simple but powerful point: only a small share of the market is actively buying at any given time. The rest are not in-market yet, which is why brand building matters.

This perspective gave marketing leaders the evidence to invest in awareness and reach. It set realistic expectations about why long-term memory creation is just as important as short-term lead capture. It remains a foundational contribution to B2B strategy.

But here’s the tension: SaaS doesn’t behave like packaged goods or banking. Trials, renewals, and churn create windows that open and close in weeks, not years.

👉 The challenge isn’t just who could buy. It’s when.

That’s why SaaS GTM needs a readiness spectrum alongside 95/5. Not to replace it, but to extend it with SaaS-specific evidence.

Respecting the Foundation   

The 95/5 Rule was never meant as a precise formula. Even John Dawes clarifies:

‍“The 95% figure is not meant to be a precise rule. We’re using it as a heuristic to get the idea across that the vast majority of businesses, for a large proportion of products, are not in the market in particular time periods.” (2021)

Seen this way, it’s a lens that rightly reframed B2B marketing. Instead of chasing every click, it urged teams to invest in brand and play the long game.

Our argument is not that 95/5 is wrong. It’s that SaaS introduces a layer of observable, recurring purchase events the original framing was never designed to capture.

The B2B SaaS Difference: Windows That Move Fast

SaaS subscription markets are more volatile than traditional categories. Buying readiness can shift suddenly, driven by events such as:

• A free trial starting overnight
• A renewal date creating urgency inside 30–90 days
• A churn freeing up budget unexpectedly
• A tech stack change that reshapes which vendors are in play

These episodic signals move accounts in and out of consideration much faster than long-cycle industries. A binary model struggles to explain that kind of movement.

👉 That’s what we call Signal Blindness: working hard but hitting at the wrong moment.

• Sales chasing the “perfect” account, only to find it just renewed
• Marketing nurturing audiences that won’t evaluate tools for months
• CS spotting churn only after the goodbye email

The cost isn’t lack of effort, it’s mistimed effort.

The Evidence: A Spectrum, Not a Binary  

To test this, we analysed 24M+ subscription events across 110+ Customer Service & Livechat vendors between 2022–2025.

Instead of a neat 95/5 split, what we found was a distribution across intent tiers:

• High intent → renewal + multiple competitor trials
• Medium intent → renewal + one competitor trial
• Low intent → early signals, renewal without trials
• Not in market → stable, recently renewed

In other words, around 24.7% of accounts show observable buying signals at any given time but split across readiness tiers.

👉 Buying isn’t binary. It’s a spectrum. And in SaaS, accounts move along it faster than most GTM teams assume.

Why This Matters for GTM   

If readiness is a spectrum, GTM execution has to reflect it. Three shifts stand out:

From binary to tiered routing

• High intent → fast, exec-level plays
• Medium intent → structured discovery and education
• Low intent → light nurture and POV content
• Not in market → long-term brand building

From ICP fit to urgency

A “perfect fit” account is irrelevant if it just renewed. Timing matters as much as profile.

From funnel-only metrics to tier-based measurement

Tracking win rate, CAC, and cycle length by intent tier reveals which slices of the market deliver returns and where effort is wasted.

A Practical Rollout   

We’ve helped SaaS teams implement this with a 30-day rollout framework:

• Week 1, Signals: map accounts into intent tiers (High, Medium, Low, Not in Market).
• Week 2, Prioritise: align SLAs and resource allocation by tier.
• Weeks 3–4, Execute & refine: run tiered plays, measure by tier, and adjust.

It doesn’t require overhauling your GTM model. It’s about using the same resources more intelligently, with timing built in.

(The detailed framework and scoring logic are in the full whitepaper.)

 What Leaders Should Measure   

Metrics need to evolve alongside the model. Three starting points:

• Win rate by tier → are you closing the right accounts fast enough?
• CAC by tier → are you overspending on accounts that won’t convert soon?
• Cycle length by tier → are high-intent opportunities taking too long?

Looking through this lens makes misalignment visible and shows where reallocation can unlock faster revenue.

How This Relates to 95/5   

The useful question isn’t “is 95/5 wrong?” It’s “does 95/5 explain SaaS with enough precision to guide GTM?”

Our answer: not fully.

95/5 is a valuable heuristic that reshaped B2B strategy. But in SaaS, renewals, trials, and churn create recurring, evidence-based buying windows that make readiness more fluid.

That’s why we frame intent as a spectrum: not to reject 95/5, but to extend it with SaaS-specific data.

What GTM Leaders Can Do This Quarter   

To get started:

1. Audit → Do you know renewal dates for your top accounts? Can you detect competitor trials quickly?
2. Tag → Map accounts into tiers and align SLAs accordingly.
3. Measure → Track win rate, CAC, and cycle time by tier. Reallocate resources quarterly to the tiers delivering returns.

Where to Go From Here   

The 95/5 Rule gave marketers a vital lens for brand. But SaaS GTM cycles are faster, more volatile, and more transparent.

Our research shows readiness isn’t binary, it’s a spectrum. And adapting to that reality is what separates wasted effort from predictable revenue.

👉 We’ve unpacked the full dataset, ratios, and rollout framework in our new whitepaper:
Beyond the 95/5 Rule: A Readiness Spectrum for SaaS GTM

Because pipeline growth doesn’t come from chasing everyone. It comes from knowing who matters now and acting at the right time.