HowGood Financial Model

Two product lines:

Impact Platform (Latis)

• SaaS tool for brands: ingredient/sourcing recommendations, portfolio benchmarking vs. competitors, on-pack claims eligibility evaluation, ESG/SDG annual reporting module (in development).
• Scores products on 247 sustainability attributes (GHG, water, soil health, labor risk, biodiversity, land use, animal welfare, processing).

Impact Data

• Data licensing: HowGood sustainability ratings and attributes embedded into retailer e-commerce, in-store POS, and brand marketing/communications.
• Powers consumer-facing ratings at checkout prompting purchase of sustainable products.
• Used by Chipotle (Real Foodprint tool) for customer-facing impact calculations.

Database moat: 15 years of supply chain mapping, 550+ data sources, 33K ingredients/chemicals/materials, 2MM+ products assessed at UPC/GTIN level, 247 sustainability metrics.

TAM breakdown:

Impact Platform addressable revenue:

• Ingredient Suppliers: $802,147,089
• CPG – Food: $4,598,403,885
• Personal Care, HABA, Cleaning Supplies: $2,267,414,400
• Retailers: $2,356,621,942
• Apparel: $1,885,039,370
• Platform Total: $11,909,626,686

Impact Data addressable revenue:

• Retailers: $589,155,485
• Food Service: $995,324,551
• CPG: $951,350,400
• ESG: $2,172,063,600
• Data Total: $4,707,894,036

Combined TAM: $16,617,520,722

Product roadmap TAM expansion: stacked-column chart shows TAM growing from ~$3B at current offerings (Data: Food Service/Retailers + Platform: CPG/Formulation) to ~$12.5B at full vertical rollout (adding Suppliers, Marketing/Packaging modules, ESG Data vertical, Cleaning Supplies/HABA/Apparel). The deck shows Platform TAM as the dominant component at full maturity.

Two streams inferred from product structure:

1. SaaS subscriptions (Impact Platform / Latis): Annual licenses to CPG brands, ingredient suppliers, and retailers for access to the formulation intelligence, benchmarking, and ESG reporting tools.
2. Data licensing (Impact Data): Per-integration or annual data feed licenses to retailers (e-commerce/in-store ratings), food service operators, CPG marketers, and ESG data aggregators.

• 624,000 more sustainable products sold per day attributed to HowGood Ratings.
• 234% average sales increase for products rated "Best" over a three-month period.
• 230%+ lift in sustainable product sales.
• Named customers: Walmart, Ahold Delhaize USA, Applegate, Kraft Heinz, Chipotle, Danone, Nestlé, Bob's Red Mill.
• Media/partner coverage: Nielsen, WSJ, Forbes, CNN Money, CBS, FOX, Bloomberg.

Stated differentiators:

• Unparalleled industry coverage: 2MM+ UPCs, 33K ingredients/materials.
• 247 sustainability attributes (environmental + social/labor).
• Supply-chain-wide positioning: serves suppliers, brands, and retailers.
• 550+ data sources.
• 15 years of data accumulation; "first to market" at this scale.
• Industry thought leadership (speaking invitations, powerful partnerships).

• Archetype + why: SaaS ARR + Data licensing revenue model. HowGood has two distinct B2B revenue streams - subscription SaaS (Latis platform seats/licenses) and data licensing (API/feed contracts). The correct archetype is a dual-stream SaaS/data ARR build: new logos × ACV per stream, with cohort-based expansion and churn. The product roadmap chart (slide 09) also implies deliberate vertical expansion driving TAM unlock over time - the model should reflect phased vertical entry.

• Forecast horizon & granularity: 5 years (Year 1–5), annual with monthly detail in Year 1. Monthly useful for cash burn / fundraise timing given the deck shows no current revenue numbers.

• Key drivers & assumptions:

*Impact Platform (SaaS):*

• Starting customer count: ~20–50 enterprise CPG/brand accounts; deck shows Kraft Heinz, Danone, Nestlé, Applegate, Walmart but gives no count - mid-range enterprise pilot stage.
• Average ACV per platform customer: $150K–$300K/year; enterprise SaaS for sustainability intelligence at this depth; rationale: analogous to data/analytics B2B SaaS pricing for large CPG.
• New logo growth rate: 30–50% YoY in Base; driven by vertical expansion per roadmap slide.
• Net Revenue Retention: 110–120%; expansion via module upsell (Nutrition, Procurement, Marketing, Packaging modules).
• Gross logo churn: 5–10%/year.

*Impact Data (licensing):*

• Starting data license customers: small number of retailer/food service integrations; Chipotle confirmed, Walmart likely.
• ACV per data license: $50K–$200K/year; varies by retailer scale; no pricing in deck.
• New data license customers: 20–30% YoY growth.

*Cost structure:*

• Gross margin: 70–80% blended (high for SaaS; data licensing may require more data ops); rationale: standard for B2B data/SaaS at scale.
• R&D as % of revenue: 30–40% early, declining to 20% by Year 5; large database/model development required.
• S&M as % of revenue: 25–35%; enterprise sales motion, long cycles.
• G&A: 10–15%.

*TAM expansion timing:*

• Use roadmap chart as the vertical unlock schedule: current offerings (~$3B TAM) → +Data CPG Vertical → +Platform Marketing/Packaging → +Data ESG → +Cleaning/HABA/Apparel (~$12.5B TAM). Model each unlock as adding a new cohort pool in Year 2–4.

• Scenarios (Base / Bull / Bear):
• Base: 35% new logo growth, 115% NRR, 75% gross margin, sequential vertical expansion per roadmap.
• Bull: 60% new logo growth, 125% NRR, faster vertical entry, data licensing picks up ESG segment ($2.17B TAM) by Year 2.
• Bear: 15% new logo growth, 105% NRR, slower vertical adoption, platform-only revenue dominant, longer sales cycles.
• Flex variables: new logo growth rate, ACV, NRR, gross margin, vertical unlock timing.

• Required sheets / outputs:

1. Assumptions dashboard (all drivers, color-coded, scenario toggle).
2. Platform ARR build (new logos, expansion, churn, ending ARR).
3. Data licensing revenue build (new contracts, expansion, churn).
4. Combined P&L (revenue, COGS, gross profit, OpEx by function, EBITDA, net income).
5. TAM penetration tracker (addressable vs. actual by vertical and year).
6. Headcount model (engineering/data, sales, G&A).
7. Cash flow & runway (given no funding ask shown, key output for investor read).
8. Scenario comparison summary.