---
title: "Opportunity Scoring Framework"
description: "Score each opportunity on 6 dimensions (1-5 scale, 30 max). Total score determines rank."
type: skill
canonical_url: https://claudary.paisolsolutions.com/skills/scoring-framework
source: "Claudary"
difficulty: intermediate
author: "Claude Code Knowledge Pack"
date: 2026-07-10T11:46:24.866Z
license: CC-BY-4.0
attribution: "Opportunity Scoring Framework — Claudary (https://claudary.paisolsolutions.com/skills/scoring-framework)"
---

# Opportunity Scoring Framework
Score each opportunity on 6 dimensions (1-5 scale, 30 max). Total score determines rank.

## Overview

# Opportunity Scoring Framework

Score each opportunity on 6 dimensions (1-5 scale, 30 max). Total score
determines rank.

## Scoring Rubric

### 1. Market Demand (1-5)

| Score | Criteria                                                                           |
| ----- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 1     | No evidence of demand; no search volume; no Reddit posts                           |
| 2     | Minimal demand; few competitors; sparse user discussion                            |
| 3     | Moderate demand; several competitors exist; some search volume                     |
| 4     | Strong demand; active Reddit/forum discussions; growing trend                      |
| 5     | Intense demand; many "is there an app for X?" posts; rising trend on Google Trends |

### 2. Competition Weakness (1-5)

| Score | Criteria                                                              |
| ----- | --------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 1     | Dominant player with 1M+ ratings and strong reviews; no gaps          |
| 2     | Strong incumbents but with minor UX issues                            |
| 3     | Several competitors; mixed reviews; some feature gaps                 |
| 4     | Competitors have poor reviews (<3.5 stars); clear missing features    |
| 5     | Competitors are widely hated; same complaints everywhere; outdated UX |

### 3. Revenue Potential (1-5)

| Score | Criteria                                                        |
| ----- | --------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 1     | Users expect free; no monetization path; ad-only viable         |
| 2     | Low willingness to pay (<$2/mo); small addressable market       |
| 3     | Moderate pricing possible ($3-5/mo); niche but paying audience  |
| 4     | Strong pricing ($6-10/mo); competitors successfully monetize    |
| 5     | Premium pricing ($10+/mo); proven willingness to pay; large TAM |

### 4. Build Feasibility (1-5)

| Score | Criteria                                                             |
| ----- | -------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 1     | Requires hardware, complex AI, regulatory approval, or large team    |
| 2     | Significant backend infrastructure; complex integrations             |
| 3     | Moderate complexity; standard APIs; some backend needed              |
| 4     | Mostly frontend; minimal backend; well-documented APIs               |
| 5     | Pure frontend app; simple data model; solo dev can ship in 2-4 weeks |

### 5. Differentiation Clarity (1-5)

| Score | Criteria                                                        |
| ----- | --------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 1     | No clear differentiator; "me too" product                       |
| 2     | Slightly better UX but no unique value proposition              |
| 3     | One clear differentiator but hard to communicate                |
| 4     | Strong differentiator; easy to explain in one sentence          |
| 5     | Obvious gap everyone complains about; "why doesn't this exist?" |

### 6. Regulatory Safety (1-5)

| Score | Criteria                                                                    |
| ----- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 1     | High rejection risk; medical device claims, financial trading, kids (COPPA) |
| 2     | Moderate risk; health claims, dietary advice, requires special entitlements  |
| 3     | Some review considerations; needs privacy labels, data handling compliance  |
| 4     | Standard review process; no special requirements or sensitive categories    |
| 5     | Zero regulatory concerns; straightforward utility or entertainment          |

## Score Interpretation

| Total Score | Assessment                                                     |
| ----------- | -------------------------------------------------------------- |
| 25-30       | **Strong opportunity** — pursue with confidence                |
| 20-24       | **Promising** — worth building if the differentiator is clear  |
| 14-19       | **Marginal** — only pursue if you have a unique unfair advantage |
| 6-13        | **Weak** — avoid unless other factors compensate               |

## Scorecard Template

```markdown
| Dimension                    | App Idea A | App Idea B | App Idea C |
| ---------------------------- | ---------- | ---------- | ---------- |
| Market Demand (1-5)          |            |            |            |
| Competition Weakness (1-5)   |            |            |            |
| Revenue Potential (1-5)      |            |            |            |
| Build Feasibility (1-5)      |            |            |            |
| Differentiation (1-5)        |            |            |            |
| Regulatory Safety (1-5)      |            |            |            |
| **TOTAL (out of 30)**        |            |            |            |
```

## Tiebreaker Criteria

When two opportunities score within 2 points of each other:

1. **Personal interest** — Will the builder stay motivated for 6+ months?
2. **Speed to market** — Which can ship an MVP faster?
3. **Moat potential** — Which builds defensibility over time (data, switching
   costs, brand)?
4. **Content marketing fit** — Which has a natural content/SEO angle for organic
   growth?
5. **Platform alignment** — Is Apple actively promoting this category? (new APIs,
   WWDC sessions, App Store featuring)

---

Source: [Claudary](https://claudary.paisolsolutions.com/skills/scoring-framework) · https://claudary.paisolsolutions.com