Feature Investment Advisor
Evaluate whether to build a feature using revenue connection, cost structure, ROI, and strategic value. Delivers build / build-strategic / don't-build / build-later recommendations with supporting math.
Someone in the roadmap meeting just said "this feature will generate $1M!" — and you're the only one doing the math on COGS, adoption, payback, and opportunity cost. Financial lens on feature investment turns gut-feel prioritization into defensible decisions, and tells you when "strategic value" is an excuse versus a real moat.
Who it's for: PMs defending roadmap decisions with numbers, Heads of Product evaluating expensive feature bets, finance partners reviewing product investment cases, founders choosing between add-on revenue and retention features, RevOps leaders assessing monetization ideas
Example
"Should we build SSO for mid-market customers this quarter?" → Revenue connection (retention for enterprise pipeline) + cost structure (dev $120K, ongoing $2K/mo) + ROI calculation with LTV impact + strategic value (30% of pipeline requires it) → Build for strategic reasons with monitoring plan and 6-month re-evaluation criteria
CLAUDE.md Template
New here? 3-minute setup guide → | Already set up? Copy the template below.
npx ccplaybooks add feature-investment-advisor# Feature Investment Advisor
Evaluate whether to build a feature based on financial impact. Assess **revenue connection** (direct or indirect), **cost structure** (dev + COGS + OpEx), **ROI calculation**, and **strategic value** — then deliver an actionable build/don't-build recommendation with supporting math.
Not a generic prioritization framework. A financial lens that complements RICE, value-vs-effort, and user research when financial impact is a key decision factor.
## The Framework
1. **Revenue Connection** — Direct (new tier, add-on, usage charge) or Indirect (retention, conversion, expansion)
2. **Cost Structure** — Development (one-time), COGS (ongoing infra/processing), OpEx (ongoing support/maintenance)
3. **ROI Calculation** — Direct: Revenue / Dev cost. Retention: LTV impact / Dev cost. Factor in gross margin.
4. **Strategic Value** — Competitive moat, platform enabler, market positioning, risk reduction (may override pure ROI)Get new playbooks like this one
One email a week with new Claude Code workflows. Free, like everything here.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
What This Does
Walks through 4 adaptive questions — revenue connection, cost structure, constraints, recommendation — and delivers one of 4 patterns: Build Now (strong ROI), Build Strategic (weak financial but high strategic value), Don't Build (poor ROI), or Build Later (validate first). Every recommendation includes supporting math: revenue projections, contribution margin, payback period, sensitivity analysis.
Not a generic prioritization framework. A financial lens that complements RICE, value-vs-effort, and customer research.
Quick Start
mkdir -p ~/Documents/FeatureInvestment
mv ~/Downloads/CLAUDE.md ~/Documents/FeatureInvestment/
cd ~/Documents/FeatureInvestment
claude
Provide the feature, your current metrics (MRR, ARPU, churn, margin), and dev cost estimate. Claude walks through the 4 questions and delivers the recommendation with numbers.
Four Revenue Paths
- Direct monetization — Customer Base × Adoption × Price
- Retention improvement — Lifetime increase × Base × ARPU × Margin
- Conversion improvement — Trial Users × Conversion Lift × ARPU
- Expansion enabler — Base × Expansion Rate × ARPU Increase
Four Recommendation Patterns
| Pattern | Trigger | Output |
|---|---|---|
| Build Now | ROI >3:1 direct, or LTV >10:1 retention | Math + MVP plan + success metrics |
| Build Strategic | Weak ROI + high moat/platform/compliance value | Build with monitoring + 6-month re-eval |
| Don't Build | ROI <1:1, margin-diluting, no strategic value | Reject + alternatives + what-would-change thresholds |
| Build Later | Highly uncertain assumptions | Validation plan + decision criteria + timeline |
When to Use vs. Skip
Use: Expensive features (>1 eng-month), quantifiable revenue/retention impact, build/buy/partner, defending to stakeholders.
Skip: Table stakes (competitive parity required), purely qualitative, problem not yet validated, feature <1 week.
Tips & Best Practices
- Always use contribution margin, not revenue. $1M revenue at 20% margin = $200K profit.
- Check payback period against customer lifetime. 36-month payback with 24-month average lifetime = you never recover.
- Be conservative on adoption. 10-20% for add-ons. Validate with willingness-to-pay research.
- Compare to backlog, not to zero. 2:1 ROI sounds okay until the 10:1 alternative waits in backlog.
- Define "strategic" precisely. Moat / platform enabler / compliance — not a vague vibe.
Common Pitfalls
- Confusing revenue with profit (ignoring COGS and margin)
- Overestimating adoption (100% of customers won't use a paid add-on)
- Building without validating the underlying churn reason or demand
- Using "strategic value" as an excuse for features that can't justify their own ROI
- Celebrating vanity metrics (engagement) instead of tying features to revenue or retention