How confident is your brand?

The Brand Confidence Scorecard measures whether your Brand, Experience, and Performance are operating as an integrated system or as three separate tracks. Nineteen questions. A composite score. A personalized analysis.

No email required to see your results.

Questions 19 scored

Time 8 to 10 minutes

Output Personalized analysis

About your brand

A few quick questions before we begin

These questions are unscored. They help us calibrate your results.

Does your brand operate in the Health and Wellness space?

Yes: Health and Wellness is our primary category
Partially: H&W products but not our only category
No: we operate outside of H&W

How long has your brand been in market?

Less than 2 years
2 to 5 years
5 to 10 years
10 or more years

How would you describe the current state of your brand positioning documentation?

Fully documented and actively used
Exists but not consistently applied
Informally understood, not formally documented
Actively working to define or redefine it

Brand (1 of 2)

Positioning and Identity

When different people on your internal team (across marketing, social, product, or customer service) describe your brand, how consistent is the language they use?

Very consistent: people in different functions use essentially the same language without prompting.
Mostly consistent: there is alignment on the core, but function-specific variations appear.
Inconsistent: language varies noticeably depending on who you ask.
We have not tested this.

When you look at your top-performing creative or content (the stuff that actually drives engagement or conversion) what does it tend to lead with?

A clear, specific benefit or outcome that matters to our consumer
Brand story or mission
Product features or service details
No clear pattern: performance varies without a consistent lead

When your brand runs a promotion or discount, how does it tend to perform relative to your standard campaigns?

Standard campaigns hold their own: promotions do not dramatically outperform.
Promotions outperform, but our differentiation outside of price is still clear.
We rely on promotions more than we would like: they drive a disproportionate share of results.
No clear read: we do not have enough data to characterize the pattern.

When you launch a new campaign, how much creative or copy work goes into re-explaining who your brand is versus building on an established consumer understanding?

Very little: we build on established consumer understanding.
Some: we occasionally need to reestablish context.
More than we would like: most campaigns carry foundational brand weight.
Most of it: we are effectively re-introducing ourselves with each campaign.

Think about a period when your brand pulled back on active marketing investment or went through a gap in campaign activity. What happened to consumer interest during that time?

It held: we maintained meaningful momentum without active spend.
It softened but recovered quickly when we reactivated.
It dropped noticeably and took real effort to rebuild.
We have never pulled back enough to know.

Brand (2 of 2)

Mission, Vision, and Purpose

When consumers describe your brand unprompted (in reviews, in social comments, in conversations you hear about) how closely does their language match the way your brand would describe itself?

Very closely: they use language and themes that mirror our own.
Somewhat closely: the sentiment is right but the language is their own.
There is a gap: they respond positively but describe us differently than we would describe ourselves.
We are not sure: we do not have strong visibility into how consumers describe us unprompted.

When you look at decisions your brand has actually made in the last 12 months (what you have said no to, how you have priced products, how you have responded to customers or handled a supply issue) how closely do those decisions reflect the mission and values your brand communicates externally?

Very closely: our decisions consistently reflect our stated mission and values and we can point to specific examples.
Mostly closely: there is genuine alignment, though we acknowledge some gaps between what we say and what we do.
Somewhat: our external purpose communication is more aspirational than our current operational reality reflects.
There is a meaningful gap: our external purpose claims go beyond what our actual decisions demonstrate.

If someone looked at everything your brand published (campaigns, content, announcements) over the last 12 months without context, how clearly would they identify a coherent direction your brand is building toward?

Very clearly: there is a recognizable through-line that points somewhere specific.
Somewhat clearly: there is a general direction, though it is not always explicit.
Probably not clearly: output is primarily campaign or moment-optimized without a visible longer arc.
We have not worked toward that kind of through-line in our planning.

In the past 12 months, has your brand made a decision that cost it something measurable (revenue, a partnership, a product choice, a distribution channel) because moving forward would have compromised what the brand stands for?

Yes, and we were transparent about it externally: it became part of our brand story.
Yes, but we handled it internally and did not highlight it publicly.
We have not been in a situation that forced that kind of tradeoff yet.
Brand values do not typically function as a veto on commercial decisions for us.

Experience

Consumer insights, competition, and retention

When your team makes a significant decision about creative direction, channel mix, messaging, or product positioning, what is that decision primarily grounded in?

Proprietary consumer research or ongoing data collection specific to our audience.
A combination of platform analytics, category research, and informed team intuition.
Primarily team intuition, category norms, and competitive observation: we do not have strong primary research.
Decisions are largely based on what has worked before: we do not have a formal approach to consumer insight.

When your team makes the case for why consumers choose you over your closest competitors, what is that argument primarily based on?

Proprietary data: win/loss analysis or consumer research telling us specifically why we are chosen.
Strong qualitative signals: consistent themes in reviews, customer service feedback, and community responses.
Our best read of the competitive landscape: informed by observation, though not validated by consumer data.
We do not have a well-developed answer to why consumers choose us: it is not something we have formally examined.

What is your clearest signal that consumers who try your brand once are likely to return?

We track repeat purchase or engagement rates and they are meaningfully strong: above category norms.
We track them and they are in line with category norms: solid but not exceptional.
We have some data, but retention is an active challenge we are working to improve.
We do not have clear visibility into repeat purchase or engagement patterns.

Performance

Efficiency, attribution, and organic pull

Over the last 12 to 18 months, what has happened to the cost of acquiring a new customer or generating a conversion through your primary paid channels?

Improving or holding stable: efficiency trend is favorable.
Roughly flat with some pressure: manageable but worth watching.
Increasing: meaningful cost growth or diminishing returns are becoming a real concern.
We do not have clear enough visibility into acquisition cost trends to characterize them accurately.

When your team presents campaign results internally, what does the conversation around attribution typically look like?

We have a consistent methodology that accounts for both immediate conversion and longer-term brand influence.
We use last-click or platform-reported attribution: imperfect, but applied consistently with shared understanding of its limits.
Attribution is a persistent source of tension: different stakeholders look at different numbers.
We do not have a consistent attribution approach: it is something we are working to establish.

When you look at where new customers or first-time visitors are actually coming from, how significant is the contribution of channels your brand does not directly pay for (organic search, direct traffic, earned press, word-of-mouth, or creator content you did not fund)?

Meaningful: organic and earned channels are real contributors to new customer acquisition.
Some: they contribute, but paid channels are doing the majority of discovery work.
Small: paid media is driving the vast majority of new customer acquisition and organic is minimal.
We do not have clear enough attribution to know what is actually driving discovery.

Intersections

Where Brand, Experience, and Performance connect

If you walked through your brand's full consumer journey (from first ad impression, to landing page, through first purchase, to first post-purchase touchpoint) how consistent would the emotional register, visual language, and tone be at each step?

Very consistent: it feels like the same brand from first contact through follow-up.
Mostly consistent: there are a few notable seams, but the core identity carries through.
Inconsistent in meaningful ways: some touchpoints feel noticeably disconnected from the brand's intended identity.
We have not audited the full consumer journey recently enough to answer this honestly.

When you look at your best-performing performance creative (the ads or content that drove your strongest conversion results in the last 12 months) how much of it clearly reinforces your brand positioning?

Most of it: our highest-performing creative tends to also be clearly on-brand. We do not see significant tension between performance and brand.
Mixed: some strong performers are on-brand, others are more transactional and could have run for any competitor.
Mostly transactional: our performance creative is optimized for conversion mechanics and does not consistently reinforce who we are.
We have not looked at our performance creative through a brand lens: results and brand are evaluated separately.

When you think about where your brand puts the majority of its media investment, how confident are you that those channels reflect where your specific consumers actually discover, research, and decide (as opposed to where category convention says you should be)?

Very confident: our channel mix is grounded in our own consumer research on discovery behavior, validated by performance results.
Somewhat confident: we have evidence for primary channels, but some of our mix is based on category assumptions we have not fully tested.
Uncertain: our channel mix is largely inherited or built on convention; we have not mapped it formally to our consumers' actual journey.
We have never formally mapped our consumers' discovery and decision journey to our channel investments.

When a channel's performance metrics decline (when cost-per-result rises or conversion rate drops) what primarily drives the decision about whether to invest more, hold, or exit?

A combination of performance data and consumer behavior signals: we check whether our consumers are still active on the channel before cutting.
Primarily performance data: if the numbers are not working, we reduce or exit regardless of consumer behavior on the platform.
Largely leadership intuition and competitive observation: we watch what others are doing and calibrate accordingly.
We do not have a clear or consistent decision framework for channel investment changes.