Names and aliases
unfulfilled demand share, demand without outcome
Formula
eligible_demand_without_success / eligible_demand × 100%
Metric card
| Unit | % |
|---|---|
| Data source | Qualified-demand cohorts plus terminal outcome or observation-window-close events. |
| Frequency | After each cohort window closes, monitored on the operating cycle. |
| Segments | micro-market, category, geography, price, channel, cohort |
Interpretation errors
- Treating no purchase as no supply without checking price, quality, and intent.
- Including immature cohorts whose window remains open.
- Mixing different terminal outcomes in one denominator.
Example
Illustrative example: 25 units without an outcome among 100 eligible demand units produce 25%. The values are synthetic.
Use
Keep failure reasons separate: no candidate, irrelevant candidate, no response, rejected price, cancelled match, or failed fulfilment. The total unmet share starts a diagnosis; it does not explain it.
Anti-example
Do not fund supply acquisition solely because unmet demand is high when price mismatch or existing-supply quality may create the gap.
Limitations
- The measure does not identify why the outcome was absent.
- It depends on eligibility, success definition, and window length.
Related metrics
fill-rate, time-to-match, zero-result-rate, cancellation-rate
Context sources
These works provide two-sided-market context; the formula above remains an author-defined working definition.
- Geoffrey G. Parker, Marshall W. Van Alstyne. Two-Sided Network Effects: A Theory of Information Product Design (2005).
- Mark Armstrong. Competition in Two-Sided Markets (2006).