Monthly recurring revenue
+2.1%$1.24M
USD per month · target $1.20M
Twelfth consecutive month of growth; compounding at roughly 2% month over month.
Example dashboard — demo data.Synthetic figures built to illustrate the instrumentation. No employer data.
These four boards are worked examples by Alvaro Garcia, built to demonstrate business acumen: what to measure, who to measure it for, and what to conclude from the reading. The numbers are invented; the judgment is the point.
C-level financial
Executive Financial Dashboard
- Audience
- CEO, CFO, board
- The question it answers
- Is the business growing profitably, and is technology spend earning its place in the P&L?
- Measurement period
- Rolling 12 months, Sep 2025 – Aug 2026 · headline values as of 31 Aug 2026
Headline
The eight numbers a board asks for
Each card carries its unit, its target and the twelve-month trend behind the figure.
Gross margin
+0.4 pp66.0%
% of revenue · target 65.0%
Revenue is outgrowing COGS, so margin expands without a pricing change.
EBITDA
+$18K$261K
USD per month · target $240K
21.0% EBITDA margin — the operating leverage is real, not a one-off.
IT spend as % of revenue
-0.1 pp5.6%
% of revenue · target ≤ 6.0%
IT cost is growing slower than the business it supports. That is the whole objective.
LTV : CAC
+0.28×8.7×
ratio · target ≥ 3.0×
CAC down to $524 while LTV climbed to $4,580.
Budget variance
-3.1%
% vs. plan · target ±3.0%
$36K under plan — favourable, but outside the ±3% tolerance, which means the forecast was wrong. Engineering is the only overrun.
Project portfolio ROI
91.6%
% return on invested · target ≥ 40%
$1.48M annualized benefit against $774K invested.
Blended CAC
$319
USD per closed deal · target ≤ $350
Partner referrals hold the blended number down; paid search carries the volume.
Revenue, gross profit and EBITDA
Unit: USD thousands per month
Revenue grew 27% across twelve months while EBITDA more than doubled — the gap between the lines is the operating leverage.
Show data table
| Month | Revenue | COGS | Opex | Gross profit | EBITDA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep | $982K | $364K | $512K | $618K | $106K |
| Oct | $1.00M | $371K | $519K | $633K | $114K |
| Nov | $1.02M | $374K | $522K | $647K | $125K |
| Dec | $1.06M | $386K | $534K | $672K | $138K |
| Jan | $1.07M | $388K | $531K | $685K | $154K |
| Feb | $1.10M | $393K | $536K | $703K | $167K |
| Mar | $1.12M | $399K | $541K | $725K | $184K |
| Apr | $1.15M | $404K | $545K | $743K | $198K |
| May | $1.17M | $408K | $548K | $760K | $212K |
| Jun | $1.20M | $414K | $552K | $781K | $229K |
| Jul | $1.22M | $419K | $556K | $799K | $243K |
| Aug | $1.24M | $423K | $559K | $820K | $261K |
- Revenue
- Gross profit
- EBITDA
Margin structure and IT intensity
Unit: % of revenue
IT spend as a share of revenue fell from 6.2% to 5.6% while absolute IT spend rose 13%. The function is scaling sub-linearly with the business.
Show data table
| Month | Gross margin | EBITDA margin | IT % of revenue |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep | 62.9% | 10.8% | 6.2% |
| Oct | 63.0% | 11.4% | 6.3% |
| Nov | 63.4% | 12.2% | 6.3% |
| Dec | 63.5% | 13.0% | 6.2% |
| Jan | 63.8% | 14.4% | 6.1% |
| Feb | 64.1% | 15.2% | 6.0% |
| Mar | 64.5% | 16.4% | 6.0% |
| Apr | 64.8% | 17.3% | 5.8% |
| May | 65.1% | 18.2% | 5.8% |
| Jun | 65.4% | 19.2% | 5.7% |
| Jul | 65.6% | 20.0% | 5.7% |
| Aug | 66.0% | 21.0% | 5.6% |
- Gross margin
- EBITDA margin
- IT spend % of revenue
Budget vs. actual by area
Unit: USD thousands, year to date
$36K under plan overall. Engineering delivery is the only line above budget.
Show data table
| Area | Budget | Actual | Variance |
|---|---|---|---|
| Infrastructure & cloud | $268K | $251K | $-17K |
| Engineering delivery | $412K | $428K | +$16K |
| Security & compliance | $156K | $149K | $-7K |
| AI & automation | $124K | $118K | $-6K |
| Vendor & licensing | $198K | $176K | $-22K |
Unit economics — LTV against CAC
Unit: ratio, LTV divided by CAC
CAC fell 14% while LTV rose 15%. Both moving the right way at once is what makes the ratio durable rather than a pricing artefact.
Show data table
| Month | CAC | LTV | LTV:CAC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sep | $612 | $3,980 | 6.50× |
| Oct | $604 | $4,010 | 6.64× |
| Nov | $598 | $4,055 | 6.78× |
| Dec | $611 | $4,090 | 6.69× |
| Jan | $589 | $4,160 | 7.06× |
| Feb | $578 | $4,215 | 7.29× |
| Mar | $566 | $4,280 | 7.56× |
| Apr | $559 | $4,325 | 7.74× |
| May | $548 | $4,390 | 8.01× |
| Jun | $541 | $4,450 | 8.23× |
| Jul | $533 | $4,510 | 8.46× |
| Aug | $524 | $4,580 | 8.74× |
Project portfolio
What the investment actually returned
Reported per project rather than blended, because a single portfolio ROI hides which bets paid and which are still in flight.
| Project | Invested | Annualized benefit | Return |
|---|---|---|---|
| Payments platform hardening | $340K | $512K | 1.5× |
| Document intelligence rollout | $210K | $468K | 2.2× |
| Cloud cost remediation | $96K | $289K | 3.0× |
| Service desk automation | $128K | $214K | 1.7× |
| Portfolio | $774K | $1.48M | 1.9× |
Marketing to deals
Where revenue actually comes from
The funnel a CFO cares about is the one that ends in closed business, not the one that ends in impressions. Blended CAC across all four channels is $319 per deal.
Impressions
482,000
Paid + organic reach across all channels
Marketing Qualified Leads
4,8201.0% of previous
1% conversion on impressions
Sales Qualified Leads
2,10643.7% of previous
BANT-qualified by the SDR team
Proposals Sent
74435.3% of previous
After discovery and scoping calls
Closed-Won
18324.6% of previous
New logo clients this month
| Channel | Spend | Deals | CAC |
|---|---|---|---|
| LinkedIn Ads | $12,400 | 24 | $517 |
| Google Search | $18,900 | 47 | $402 |
| Content / SEO | $4,200 | 19 | $221 |
| Partner referrals | $2,100 | 28 | $75 |
How to read this
What I would say in the room
The numbers above are instrumentation. This is the part that is actually the job — what the pattern means, what it does not mean, and what I would do about it.
- Working
Margin expansion is structural, not seasonal
Gross margin improved for eleven of twelve months while revenue grew 27%. COGS is growing at roughly half the rate of revenue, which means the unit economics improve as volume arrives rather than degrading. Protect this by holding infrastructure cost per transaction flat as scale continues.
- Watch
Engineering delivery is the only line over plan
Engineering is $16K over a $412K budget while every other area came in under. That is contractor spend pulled forward to hit the platform-hardening dates, not a run-rate problem — but it needs to be re-forecast rather than absorbed silently, because the same pull-forward will not be available next quarter.
- Working
IT spend is decoupled from revenue growth
IT spend as a share of revenue fell from 6.2% to 5.6% across the year while absolute IT spend rose 13%. This is the number to put in front of a board: the function is scaling sub-linearly with the business, which is what buys the credibility to ask for the next investment.
- Context
Partner referrals are the cheapest channel and the smallest
At $75 per deal, referrals convert eleven times more efficiently than LinkedIn Ads at $517. The channel produced 28 deals on $2.1K of spend. The question for the CRO is not whether to shift budget, it is whether referral volume can be manufactured at all — most of the time it cannot, which is why the paid channels still deserve their allocation.
- Working
Portfolio ROI is carried by two of four projects
Document intelligence returned 2.2× and cloud cost remediation 3.0×, while service desk automation is at 1.7× and still ramping. Reporting a single blended portfolio ROI hides that spread — the board should see which bets paid and which are still in flight.