Metrics
What numbers consultants lead with.
Every slide that foregrounds a metric — 7,750 in total — classified into families by what's being measured. Drill in to see who uses each family, where in the narrative, and the real examples.
Metric families
7,750 metric-led slides1266
Survey & sentiment
What people said — respondents, priorities, sentiment, NPS.
16.3%
1110
Market size & value
Scale of the pool — TAM, GMV, AUM, deal value, investment, funding.
14.3%
709
Cost & savings
What's spent or saved — costs, spend, savings, efficiency, abatement.
9.1%
541
Share & penetration
Piece of the pie — market share, adoption, penetration, uptake.
7.0%
491
Growth rate
Speed of change — CAGR, YoY, growth rate.
6.3%
261
Rates & ratios
Other rates — retention, conversion, representation, distress.
3.4%
324
Employment & headcount
People at work — employees, FTEs, productivity, jobs.
4.2%
226
Indices & scores
Composite indicators — confidence indices, rankings, ratings.
2.9%
218
Margin & return
Economic quality — margins, ROI/ROE/ROIC, TSR, profit.
2.8%
212
Environment & emissions
Green metrics — GHG, emissions, hydrogen, renewables.
2.7%
187
Volume & counts
Raw counts — number of X, transactions, deals.
2.4%
141
Revenue & sales
Top line — revenue, sales, GVA.
1.8%
76
Macro indicators
Economy-wide signals — inflation, unemployment, PMI.
1.0%
23
Valuation
Asset worth — present value, pre-money, exit value.
0.3%
1965
Other
Domain-specific or uncategorized long-tail.
25.4%
Filtered by margin_return
· function quantify_impact
· clear
Where in the narrative
Number shape
| percent | 122 |
| plain | 43 |
| multiplier | 33 |
| money | 20 |
22 examples
-2.7pp
If no counter measures are taken, average EBITDA impact could range -0.2 to -2.7 pp for hyper/supermarkets
“The potential profit impact of each trend individually for a normative hyper/supermarket based on the current P&L structure”
0.5%
Stepping up quality of private label & develop private brands to grow to 15% of volume could add up to 0.5% in EBITDA margin
“Stepping up quality of private label & develop private brands to grow to 15% of volume could add up to 0.5% in EBITDA margin”
0.5 – 1%
Reshaping store networks to close 10% of stores and recouping 50% of sales could add up to 0.5 – 1% EBITDA margin
“Reshaping store networks is a lever for grocery retailers to improve profitability and consumer experience, with retailers increasingly shifting focus from netw…”
0.25 – 0.75%
Driving COGS reduction by 0.3 – 1% through supplier negotiation and buying-alliance activity could add 0.25 – 0.75% EBITDA uplift
“Driving COGS reduction by 0.3 – 1% through supplier negotiation and buying-alliance activity could add 0.25 – 0.75% EBITDA uplift.”
0.5 – 1%
Improve end-to-end productivity through advanced technologies to reduce labor cost with 5 – 10% could give EBITDA uplift of 0.5 – 1%
“This calculation does not take into account the (one off) initial investment, dependent on boldness of investment this can be a large CAPEX investment (g., full…”
0.25–0.75pp
Monetizing Retail Media towards 0.75 – 1.5% additional revenue could give an EBITDA uplift of 0.25 – 0.75%
“Monetizing Retail Media (RM) has emerged as driver of profitability with margins reaching up to 70% within 3 years of launching.”
-1.0pp
1. If 90-100% of food COGS inflation can be passed on to consumers without affecting volumes, the EBITDA impact is -1.0pp to opp
“1.0pp decline in Gross margin, which fully translates to 1.0pp EBITDA margin decline”
-0.3pp
2. If 90-100% of labor cost increase due to labor market tightness can be passed on to consumers, the EBITDA impact is -0.3pp to opp
“90-100% of labor cost increase can be passed on to consumers”
0.2pp
3. GLP-1 drug users spend 6-11% less on groceries resulting in EBITDA margin decline of 0.1 to 0.2pp
“0.2-1.0% drop in volumes depending on the GLP-1 drug adoption rates, translating to 0.2-1.0% decrease in revenues and COGS”
+0.2pp
5. The increasing share or private label positively impacts EBITDA margin by 0.0pp to +0.2pp
“In low case with 31% private label share by 2029, and assuming a 5% better gross margin of private label, the total impact on the EBITDA is 0.0pp”
2.1x
Leading companies extract greater value by focusing their AI investments
“In reality, most companies go broad and dilute efforts across multiple pilots, seeing lower ROI as a result”
~16%
Real impact being achieved across sectors
180
180 large, publicly traded companies could see profit losses beyond 10% by 2030 if they do not manage their nature risks¹
“Firms at risk of losing 10% -40% of profits are concentrated in utilities, agriculture, and chemicals.”
21%
Companies with stronger Sustainability DNA are more likely to deliver financial value and a lasting positive impact on society and the environment
“Sustainability DNA is central to companies' ability to operate both profitably and mindfully.”
$3.7 trillion
If the employee perception gap were narrowed by 50 percent...
“We estimate that global profits would be higher by 33 percent, equivalent to $3.7 trillion in 2019.”
4.5
High performing transformations offer 4-5 times more impact on EBITDA than median transformations
“X 4,5”
541
EDL reaches profitability by 2024 in all three scenarios
$18 B
Actions within Postal Service control: Four sets of actions could reduce the 2020 gap by $18 B
$18 B
Actions within Postal Service control: Four sets of actions could reduce the 2020 gap by $18 B
$115B
USPS can pursue actions within its control to reduce the FY2020 gap
“Actions within Postal Service control reduce the 2020 annual loss to $15 billion, and the cumulative loss to $115 billion”
$33B
“Fundamental Change” that increases USPS flexibility will be required to close the remaining gap
“Actions within Postal Service control reduce the 2020 annual loss to $15 billion, and the cumulative loss to $115 billion”
17%
“Moving up a level brings its own rewards; for organizations that improved one maturity level we estimated global profitability, captured by EBITDA, could rise a…”