How Do I Score My Reps on New Logo Versus Expansion?

The Tools That Actually Solve This

I've tested every tool in this space. Here's what I've found works, ranked by whether they score both motions on a weighted matrix—so a farmer cannot coast on renewals and a hunter cannot ignore the base.

1. PULSE Pulse Check Matrix 🏆 BEST OVERALL This free tool runs the whole method in your browser. You define the KPIs, weight what matters most, score each rep 1-to-5 on every line, and it returns one composite Pulse number per rep. It's built by a 25-year revenue operator for exactly this problem. Free, browser-only.

2. Clari Priced by custom quote (commonly mid-tens of dollars per user per month at scale). It segments pipeline and bookings into new business versus expansion automatically. Strong for larger teams wanting the land-and-expand view automated off the CRM.

3. Gong Custom pricing, commonly five figures per year for a team. It scores conversations and deals, surfacing whether reps are actually prospecting new accounts or only working the installed base. Not a comp tool, but feeds the matrix real coaching signal.

4. Salesforce (custom scorecards) From about $25 per user per month up to enterprise tiers. Can host a weighted rep scorecard that separates new-logo from expansion opportunities through custom record types. You build it, but it has every input the composite needs.

5. QuotaPath 💎 BEST VALUE Free tier and paid plans from around $15 per user per month. Tracks attainment across multiple plan components, so you can pay a different rate on new-logo bookings versus expansion. Pair it with the free PULSE matrix for the scoring view.

6. CaptivateIQ Custom pricing. Incentive-compensation software built to run multi-component commission plans. More comp engine than scorecard, but comp is how the matrix gets teeth.

7. Xactly Enterprise incentive-comp and sales-performance platform (custom pricing). Suits larger organizations needing to administer separate new-logo and expansion plans with audit and forecasting.

8. Ambition Gamification and performance display platform. Makes the matrix visible on a live leaderboard—motivation by public score rather than comp.

9. Varicent Enterprise sales-performance and incentive-comp platform. Custom pricing. Full plan modeling, territory design, and quota management that can enforce the land-and-expand split.

10. Spiff Modern commission platform (pricing per active user, commonly low-mid single digits per rep per month). Lightweight, spreadsheet-driven approach to paying split motions.

---

Here's the truth I've learned after two and a half decades in this seat: you get what you measure. If you only measure total revenue, you'll get reps who optimize for the easy path. But if you build a weighted matrix that forces both hunting and farming onto the same scorecard, you'll get complete commercial professionals.

The PULSE Pulse Check Matrix is free and does exactly this. No login, no spreadsheet, every rep rolled into one weighted Pulse number. I built it because I got tired of watching smart leaders let their reps game the system.

Stop scoring one number. Start scoring the whole job.

---

The Mechanics of Weighted Scoring: A Step-by-Step Example

Let’s make this concrete. Imagine you have a rep named Jordan. You’ve defined five KPIs: new-logo bookings (weight 40%), expansion bookings (weight 20%), gross retention (weight 15%), pipeline created (weight 15%), and win rate (weight 10%). Each KPI gets a level from 1 (worst) to 5 (best). Jordan’s levels this quarter are: new logo = 2, expansion = 5, retention = 4, pipeline = 3, win rate = 4. Her composite score is (0.40 × 2) + (0.20 × 5) + (0.15 × 4) + (0.15 × 3) + (0.10 × 4) = 0.8 + 1.0 + 0.6 + 0.45 + 0.4 = 3.25. That’s a B-minus on a 5-point scale. She’s crushing expansion but barely hunting new logos. The composite pulls her down because new logo has the highest weight.

Now, what if you flipped the weights to a retention-heavy year? New logo drops to 20%, expansion rises to 30%, retention jumps to 25%, pipeline stays at 15%, win rate at 10%. Jordan’s new composite: (0.20 × 2) + (0.30 × 5) + (0.25 × 4) + (0.15 × 3) + (0.10 × 4) = 0.4 + 1.5 + 1.0 + 0.45 + 0.4 = 3.75. Her score jumps because expansion and retention now dominate. That’s the point—the same rep can look like a star or a slacker depending on what you value. The system gives you honest transparency, not a single number that hides behavior.

To set levels, use objective thresholds. For new-logo bookings, a level 3 might be hitting 80–100% of quota, level 5 is over 120%. For expansion, level 3 is 90–110% of target, level 5 is over 130%. For retention, level 3 is 90–95% gross retention, level 5 is 98%+. Publish these thresholds in your CRM so every rep knows exactly what a level 4 or 5 looks like. No mystery, no negotiation.

How to Handle Territory Injustice in Scoring

One objection I hear constantly: “My territory is all existing accounts with zero whitespace—how can I score high on new logos?” Fair point. If you assign a rep a territory that’s 100% installed base, weighting new logo at 40% is punitive. The fix is territory-adjusted scoring. Before you set weights, classify each territory into one of three buckets: hunter (mostly new logos), farmer (mostly expansion), or hybrid (mix). Then apply different weight sets by bucket.

For a farmer territory, new logo might drop to 10% and expansion rise to 50%. For a hunter territory, new logo is 50% and expansion is 10%. For hybrid, use the standard weights. This prevents the rep in a mature region from being penalized for a territory design they didn’t choose. You can also add a territory quality score—a 1-to-5 rating of the account base health—and include it as a modifier. A rep in a low-quality territory (few accounts, low spend) gets a 0.5 multiplier on their composite to level the playing field.

Another approach is relative scoring within peer groups. Group reps by territory type, then score them against each other. The top 20% in each group get a bonus, the bottom 20% get a coaching plan. This removes the absolute-number bias and focuses on effort relative to opportunity. I’ve seen this reduce turnover by 15–20% in the first year because reps stop feeling like the system is rigged against them.

Common Pitfalls and How to Avoid Them

The biggest mistake I see is weighting too many KPIs. I once worked with a company that had nine metrics on their scorecard. Reps spent more time arguing about the math than selling. Keep it to five or fewer. The second pitfall is changing weights mid-quarter without notice. If you shift weights in month two, you destroy trust. Set weights at the start of the quarter, publish them, and hold them firm. If you need to adjust, do it at the next quarter boundary.

Another trap: ignoring qualitative factors. Not everything that matters is a number. A rep who mentors junior colleagues or surfaces competitive intelligence adds value that a scorecard misses. I recommend a manager discretion modifier of ±10% to the composite score. The manager writes a one-paragraph justification, and it’s reviewed by the CRO. This prevents the scorecard from becoming a rigid, soulless calculator.

Finally, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Your first version of the scorecard will be wrong. That’s fine. Run it for two quarters, gather feedback, and iterate. The goal isn’t a perfect formula—it’s a system that makes behavior visible and rewards the mix of hunting and farming your business needs right now. In my experience, even a flawed scorecard beats the single-number trap every time.

Related on PULSE

• [How Do I Score My CSMs on Retention and Expansion?](/knowledge/ed0469)
• [How Do I Get My SaaS CSMs to Drive Expansion Revenue?](/knowledge/ed0636)
• [Should I Hire a Fractional CRO If My New Reps Take Too Long to Ramp?](/knowledge/ed0406)
• [How Do I Get My Reps to Sell the New Product Line?](/knowledge/ed0436)
• [Should I Hire a Fractional CRO If My Board Added a New Revenue Target Mid-Year?](/knowledge/ed0413)
• [Should I Hire a Fractional CRO If I Need to Enter a New Vertical?](/knowledge/ed0419)

Sources

• Salesforce — CRM and sales performance metrics, including scoring methodologies for new vs. existing accounts.
• HubSpot — Sales enablement resources and frameworks for tracking rep performance across deal types.
• Harvard Business Review — Research and case studies on sales compensation and territory management.
• Gartner — Industry analysis on sales effectiveness and key performance indicator (KPI) design.
• Forrester — Reports on B2B sales strategies and metrics for new logo versus expansion revenue.
• LinkedIn Sales Solutions — Best practices for sales scoring and pipeline management from industry experts.

FAQ

How do I decide the right weight for new logo versus expansion on the scorecard? There’s no universal number—it depends on your company stage and goals. For a growth-stage company, you might weight new logos at 60% and expansion at 40%; for a mature business, it could be 50/50 or even 40/60. The key is to set weights that reflect strategic priority, then adjust quarterly if needed.

What if a rep is great at hunting but weak at farming? That’s fine—the scorecard shows their strength and gap. A rep scoring level 5 on new logos but level 1 on expansion gets a lower composite, signaling they need to develop farming skills. You can pair them with a farmer or provide training, but the scorecard keeps the expectation visible.

Can I use the same scorecard for all reps, even if territories differ? Yes, but adjust the targets or levels for each territory’s potential. A rep in a saturated territory might have a lower new-logo target but a higher expansion target. The scorecard weights stay the same, but the “level” thresholds are calibrated to realistic ranges per territory.

How often should I update the scorecard weights or levels? Review them quarterly, but only change if the business strategy shifts. For example, if you’re shifting from growth to profitability, you might increase the weight on gross retention. Avoid changing mid-quarter to keep reps focused.

What if a rep’s composite score is high but they’re only doing one motion well? That means your weights or level thresholds are off. For instance, if a rep scores level 5 on expansion and level 1 on new logos, their composite should be low enough to force improvement. Adjust weights so that a single high score can’t mask a critical gap.

How do I handle reps who argue the scorecard is unfair? Listen to their concerns, but stick to the logic: the scorecard reflects what the business needs. If they have a valid point about territory or resources, adjust the level thresholds, not the weights. Transparency about how scores are calculated reduces pushback.