Growth & marketing

Why should a business publish its own numbers?

The short answer

Because a number a reader can check is worth more than an impressive one they cannot. Publishing counts from your own work — products, workflows, tests — instead of percentages and testimonials makes every claim traceable, and it filters for buyers who value that.

Updated September 26, 2026

Counts, not percentages

The proof strip on this site is a row of counts — products in a catalogue, workflows in an estate, subscribers on infrastructure we own — rather than a row of percentages. It reads flatter, and it is the only version where we can show you how to check it.

What it rules out

No testimonial wall, and no results page with cohort averages, because there is no cohort we could describe honestly. Of the fourteen systems on the site, three link to a public URL you can open; the rest say "Private".

Most of what can be proved is unglamorous

"2,257 supplier photos matched on exact SKU" is not a headline. Anyone who has tried it recognises the problem on sight, which is a better filter than a percentage.

Make it a rule the build enforces

Every number has to trace to a metric on a case study or a stage in a system that shipped. A rule in a style guide gets broken by someone with a deadline; a rule the build checks does not.

The full argument is in why we publish our own numbers.

Asked next

Don't percentages persuade buyers better than raw counts?

They look better, but a percentage without its base cannot be checked. A count tied to a named system can be, and the buyers who check are usually the ones worth winning.

What if a published number turns out to be wrong?

Then it gets corrected, visibly. Every metric sits on a case study that sets out the work behind it, so the method travels with the count and a reader can see how it was arrived at.