NESNet Entropy Score
Net Entropy Score · Revenue Impact Calculator

Find where your brand is leaking trust, margin, and growth.

A two-part diagnostic. Score your brand's predicted consistency from public signals, then model the dollar impact of improving that consistency on your existing revenue base. Numbers are scenario-bounded and calibrated to the NES v1.0 framework.

1Answer 5 questionsPick one option per question. Your Predicted NES updates live.
2Set your revenue contextDrag the sliders, choose your category. See the dollar impact instantly.
3Run a free scanGet a live consistency read on your brand in two minutes. No login.
Step 1

Quick consistency diagnostic

Five questions. Each answer is what an attentive operator would observe about their own brand. The result is a Predicted NES on the framework's scale of −100 to +100, where positive numbers indicate consistency-driven compounding and negative numbers indicate consistency-driven decay.

1Across customer reviews and word-of-mouth, how consistently do customers describe their experience with your brand?
2Repeat-purchase or retention rate trend over the last 12 months
3Frequency of customer complaints about operational delivery (shipping, product quality, support response)
4How aligned is your brand voice across customer-facing surfaces (website, ads, packaging, support, retail)?
5What share of your customer complaints relate to expectation-vs-delivery mismatch (versus pure product quality)?
Predicted NES
+25
Band
Healthy but constrained
Consistency is positive but the gap to compounding is meaningful. Material upside available from a structured consistency program.
Step 2

Revenue impact calculator

Set your annual revenue and operational context. The calculator returns the dollar value of what your inconsistency is costing you today, what NES can recover, and the required investment to capture it.

$1M$3.0M$500M
2%5.0%15%
Returns, refunds, churn cost, complaint resolution overhead.
LIVE · these numbers update as you change anything above
Currently losing per month
$12,500
to inconsistency
NES recovers per month
$2,813
margin recovery
Revenue uplift per month
$1,562
consistency-driven
Total NES value per month
$4,374
recovered + uplift
24-month projection
NES Value (low to high)
$90K to $120K
Required investment
$21K to $50K
Return on investment
1.8x to 5.7x
Payback window
5 to 12 months
Currently losing / month
$12,500
NES value / month
$4,374
Note.NES Value measures consistency-driven economic value on your existing customer base. Growth from new channels, markets, or product lines is modeled separately and stacks on top of NES Value. The investment number assumes the framework's standard intervention cadence over a 24-month engagement window.

See your real consistency score, not just the estimate.

The diagnostic above is your own read. Run your brand through the NES Scanner for a live, evidence-based consistency score in two minutes. Free, no login.

Run a free scan →

Where these numbers come from

The calculator is calibrated to the NES v1.0 framework, documented in the SSRN working paper. Coefficients are not exposed in this interface to keep the diagnostic founder-friendly. The methodology behind them is summarised below.

Construct

NES measures consistency of customer experience over time. It is a measurement primitive, not a growth metric or efficiency multiplier. Consistency is the upstream driver of trust, retention, and revenue compounding.

Where AI fits

AI handles the heavy lifting on the data side: reading reviews across portals, aggregating themes, mapping them to the framework's consistency bands, and producing a Review-Inferred NES read. The framework, the calibration, and the interpretation remain human-locked.

Industry calibration

Each business category carries its own revenue sensitivity to consistency improvement, calibrated against published research from Forrester CX Index, ACSI, Bain, and Heskett's Service-Profit Chain. The framework adjusts sensitivity by category.

System state

Operating state determines how much of a consistency improvement lands as new revenue versus repaired leakage. Optimized systems convert improvement to revenue. Broken systems convert improvement to recovery first, revenue second.

Ambition setting

Improvement ambition reflects the size of the consistency program. Larger programs require proportionally more investment, with a dysfunction multiplier that increases when the system is operating poorly.

Public reference

Working paper available at netentropyscore.com/paper or on SSRN (Abstract 6667158). Trademark filed in India, Class 35.

Numbers are scenario-bounded estimates calibrated to research and are not a precision forecast. The framework does not claim precision predictive validity. Use the results to open conversations, not to commit to specific revenue projections.