Multi-Tier Subscription Pricing Simulator

Simulate your multi-tier strategy: price, churn, LTV:CAC and MRR per tier. 3 scenarios, AI interpretation and monthly projection. Free.

Advanced simulator

Is my SaaS growing healthy, or only inflating MRR?

Model your tiers, churn and CAC to see which one carries the business, which only inflates MRR, and where you can move price without breaking unit economics.

Global parameters

Monthly acquisition, projection horizon and acceptance thresholds.

Subscription tiers

Define each tier with price, churn, gross margin and CAC. Order matters: the first tier is the entry tier.

Saved configurations

Fill in your data to see the report

This simulator only generates a diagnosis, charts and recommendations when it has your real business values. Fill the editor above and the report will appear automatically.

  • Plans / tiers
  • New customers per month
  • Months to project

Load a realistic case to see how the report looks. You can edit any field afterwards.

Connect with other simulators

Methodology and assumptions

How results are calculated, what we assume when modeling, and where the method loses precision.

Formula

MRR = Σ (Plan × Customers) · Conversion lift per plan = Pricing power × tier elasticity

Assumptions

  • Plan-level conversions stable across the simulated horizon.
  • No cannibalization between plans (each customer enters a single tier).
  • Equal churn across tiers unless specified otherwise.

Applicability limits

  • The model does not capture psychological pricing effects (anchoring, decoy).
  • Tier-to-tier migrations must be modeled separately as upsell or downgrade.
  • Usage-based pricing requires an auxiliary metric — not included by default.

Sources

How it works

1. Define your tiers

Each tier with price, margin, churn, CAC, adoption mix and upgrade rate. First tier is entry.

2. Enter globals

Total monthly acquisition, horizon, and LTV:CAC / payback thresholds for automatic alerts.

3. Compare scenarios

Base, conservative (churn +40%) and aggressive (churn −30%). Identify the weakest tier and optimize.

Frequently asked questions

1How do you compute LTV per tier?
LTV = ARPU × gross margin / monthly churn. Standard SaaS formula. Assumes constant churn; does not model revenue expansion within the same tier (that would be net revenue retention).
2What is the monthly upgrade rate between tiers?
It is the % of tier i customers who upgrade to tier i+1 each month. For example, 2% means 2 out of 100 Basic customers move up to Pro monthly. In mature PLG SaaS 1-3% is common; if your product has a clear upgrade path it can be higher.
3Does the simulator predict my real MRR?
No. It projects based on your assumptions (churn, CAC, mix). Useful to compare pricing strategies and understand sensitivity. For real prediction you need historical cohorts and measured per-tier churn.
4How is it different from the LTV and Churn calculator?
The LTV and Churn calculator analyzes ONE average customer. This simulator models MULTIPLE tiers, projects MRR month by month, includes per-tier CAC, inter-tier upgrades and compares 3 macro scenarios. It is the upper tier of monetization analysis.

Complete guide

Why pricing decisions carry the highest leverage in SaaS

A price change touches everything downstream: MRR, gross margin, CAC payback, churn, LTV, and sales cycle. Price Intelligently measured that a 1% improvement in pricing drives ~12% more profit, while equivalent moves in acquisition or retention deliver only 3-4%. Yet the median B2B SaaS revisits pricing every 2.4 years. The opportunity cost is enormous, and the reason founders freeze is simple: changing price feels like a one-way door because the loop (churn, conversion, expansion) takes 2-3 quarters to read. A simulator closes that loop before you ship the change.

The five models you are choosing between

Flat-rate. One product, one price. Easy to sell and explain; leaves a lot of value on the table. Works with a narrow ICP and low ACV variance.

Tiered (good-better-best). B2B SaaS default. With 3 tiers, 70-80% of revenue lands in the middle tier by design. Anchoring works: placing an expensive "Enterprise" tier next to "Pro" lifts conversion to Pro even if nobody buys Enterprise.

Per-seat / per-user. Scales with headcount. Gold standard 2015-2022. Under pressure in 2026 because AI is automating seats - customers push back when licenses stop correlating with value delivered.

Usage-based (consumption). Charges per API call, per workflow, per token. Aligns price and value; lets small customers start small. Downsides: MRR less predictable, cohorts more erratic.

Hybrid (base + usage). Flat platform fee + metered overage. Microsoft Copilot's $30/seat + AI credits is the canonical 2026 template. OpenView 2025: hybrid is in ~60% of new SaaS launches.

Value metric - the decision upstream of price

Before setting a number, pick the value metric: the unit that traces what your customer actually buys. Seats, API calls, monitored endpoints, rows processed, leads captured. Test: does it grow when your customer gets more value? If yes, it scales with you. If not (e.g., charging per seat for a co-pilot that replaces seats), your price and your value diverge.

Price elasticity - what the formula actually says

Price elasticity of demand = % change in quantity / % change in price. For a $50 -> $55 (+10%) move that drops signups from 1,000 to 900 (-10%), elasticity = -1.0 (unit elastic). In SaaS:

  • |E| > 1 (elastic): revenue drops when you raise price. Typical in B2C and commodity tools.
  • |E| < 1 (inelastic): revenue rises when you raise price. Typical in mission-critical and vertical SaaS.
  • |E| = 1: revenue stays flat.

Typical SaaS range: -0.8 to -1.8 for horizontal tools; -0.3 to -0.7 for vertical/mission-critical. Price Intelligently: price sensitivity drops 20-30% after the first year of use - expansion pricing on existing cohorts almost always wins.

The math most founders skip

Flat-rate product: new revenue = (1 + delta price) x (1 + delta quantity) x base revenue. +10% raise with -5% quantity (elasticity -0.5) = 1.10 x 0.95 = 1.045 -> +4.5%. +10% raise with -12% quantity (elasticity -1.2) = 1.10 x 0.88 = 0.968 -> -3.2%. Break-even for quantity drop = delta price / (1 + delta price). For +10%, break-even is -9.1%. If you expect to lose less, you are almost certainly in the positive.

Add incremental churn. If +10% triggers +2 pp of annual churn on the affected cohort, LTV compresses 15-20% - usually still profitable, but only if the base retention is already solid.

Van Westendorp in 20 minutes

Ask 100-300 high-intent customers or leads:

  1. At what price is it too expensive to consider?
  2. At what price does it start to feel expensive but worth it?
  3. At what price is it a bargain?
  4. At what price is it so cheap you would doubt the quality?

Plot the four cumulative curves. The intersection of "too expensive" and "bargain" is the optimal price point (OPP). The range between "expensive but worth it" and "too cheap" is your acceptable band. Cheap, fast, directionally correct - pair it with Gabor-Granger for a sharper demand curve.

Grandfathering, annualization, and the expansion lever

Three moves that almost always beat a cold raise:

  • Grandfather the existing base for 12 months and raise only new logos. Preserves cohort LTV, avoids a churn spike, and captures the full lift on the inbound book. OpenView 2024: companies that grandfather see ~40% less trigger-driven churn vs broad raises.
  • Push to annual plan with a 15-20% discount. Annuals churn only at renewal - effective monthly churn drops 60-80%. Cash collected upfront.
  • Add usage-based on top of the base. Existing customers auto-expand as they grow; your ARPU compounds without a price announcement.

Price localization — LATAM vs US tier design

A single global price in USD is a structural mistake for SaaS products with meaningful LATAM revenue. Purchasing-power parity between Mexico, Colombia, or Argentina vs the US runs 3-5×. A $99/month plan that converts well in the US will price out most SMBs in Mexico. Localized pricing strategies: (1) LATAM-tier plan: separate plan family at 30-50% of US price with local payment methods (OXXO Pay, PSE, Mercado Pago); (2) currency denomination: charge in MXN or COP to remove FX volatility risk for the customer — they pay MXN 1,200 instead of USD 60, same conversion; (3) feature gate by market: LATAM plans skip features rarely used locally (US SOC 2 audit exports, US payroll integrations) to lower cost-to-serve and justify the lower ASP.

OpenView 2025 estimates 20-35% of SaaS revenue growth in the next 5 years in the B2B segment will come from LatAm, EMEA, and APAC. Teams without a localized pricing strategy are leaving a structural slot open for regional competitors to fill at prices they can sustain.

Freemium vs free trial: the decision framework

Neither model is universally better. Freemium works when: (1) you can deliver meaningful value in the free tier without giving away the product; (2) the free user base generates network effects or product data that improves the paid tier; (3) viral loops exist (the free user shares or invites others). Free trial works when: (1) the product requires onboarding context to deliver value — a free tier confuses; (2) the buyer is a team or company, not an individual; (3) time-boxed urgency (14 days) drives conversion better than feature gating. ProductLed 2025 reports median trial-to-paid conversion of 14-22% for bottom-up PLG products; freemium-to-paid of 2-5% for consumer-leaning tools. The simulator models both paths with your specific conversion and churn rates to compute net-revenue impact.

Red flags in pricing decisions

  • Raising prices without knowing current customer elasticity — run at least a Van Westendorp survey or a Gabor-Granger ladder before committing.
  • Grandfathering forever — grandfather for 12-18 months maximum, then migrate with a documented value explanation. Permanent grandfathering creates a dual-price-class that corrodes NRR long-term.
  • Changing price without changing packaging — a price increase that is not anchored in a visible value addition (new feature, higher limits, better SLA) will land as pure extraction and trigger churn reviews.
  • Copying a competitor's price list without understanding their cost structure — your gross margin, CAC, and LTV may require a completely different price point to sustain the business.

How to use this simulator

Load current price, active subscribers, estimated elasticity, incremental churn triggered by the change, and gross margin. The engine returns projected MRR, churn, ARPU, and revenue at 12/24 months under four scenarios: no change, +10% price, +20% with grandfathering, and tier restructure (new high tier). Each scenario returns delta on net revenue, contribution margin, and quantity-drop break-even.

Illustrative case

Composite case for instructional purposes: combines sector dynamics with realistic figures. Names are fictional and do not represent a specific company.

Company: Series A B2B SaaS, HR compliance software for mid-market (100-500 employees), primary market US. ACV: $14,000/customer/year. Pricing: 3 tiers ($499 / $1,199 / $2,499 per month), per-employee add-on $2/employee/month above the tier cap. Gross margin: 82%. Headcount: 38.

Starting point: $380K MRR, 312 customers. NRR 103% (driven mostly by headcount growth on the per-employee add-on), GRR 92%, monthly logo churn 0.8%. Price had not moved in 19 months. Competitive benchmarking: the team was 22-35% below two direct comparables. A new AI-powered workflow engine (internal codename: "Audit Copilot") was about to launch and needed price framing.

The simulator ran four scenarios:

  1. Flat +15% raise across tiers without grandfathering. Projected elasticity -0.8, quantity drop 12%, incremental churn +1.8 pp in mid-tier, +2.5 pp in entry. 12-month revenue: +7.4%. Risk flagged: churn spike in months 1-3.
  2. +15% only for new logos; 12-month grandfather for existing. Zero incremental churn on the base. 12-month revenue: +11.2% (new-logo mix 18%). 24 months: +18.9%.
  3. Restructure to good-better-best with a new "Enterprise" tier at $4,999 anchoring Audit Copilot + SSO + dedicated CSM. Projected mix: 15% entry, 55% mid, 25% high, 5% enterprise. ARPU lift: +21%. 24-month revenue: +26%.
  4. Scenario 3 + layer usage-based on Audit Copilot (500 runs included, $0.40 per additional run). 24-month revenue: +34%, with 41% of lift from expansion on existing accounts.

Decision: they shipped Scenario 4. Grandfathered the 312 existing customers at old base pricing, new logos at the new tier sheet, Audit Copilot only in mid and high, metering across all tiers.

Result at month 9: logo churn held at 0.9% (no spike). NRR rose to 121% driven by Audit Copilot overage. Blended ARPU rose 27% (the simulator had projected 21-28%). MRR reached $612K (vs baseline no-op of $420K). New-logo ACVs: 31% higher than the Q1 cohort. Series B closed at 14x ARR, up from the 9x the board had modeled before the change. The CEO's board-deck summary: "We did not raise prices. We added a value metric and let customers self-scale up the ladder."

From theory to calculation

When you need more than a quick calculation, our advanced simulators model full scenarios with your data.

See advanced simulators

Sector reference ranges

Indicative ranges based on public sector literature and operational observation. Your business may differ — use the numbers as a starting point, not as a target.

MetricValueSource
Profit lift from 1% improvement in pricing11-15%Price Intelligently Monetization Report 2024
Median pricing review frequency in SaaSevery 2.4 yearsOpenView SaaS Pricing Benchmarks 2024
Penetration of hybrid pricing models in new SaaS45-55%OpenView 2025 SaaS Pricing Benchmarks
Decline in price sensitivity after first year of use30-50%Price Intelligently / ProfitWell 2023
Churn reduction — grandfathering vs across-the-board increase50-70% less churnOpenView 2024 Pricing Change Playbook
Median NRR — public SaaS114%Bessemer Cloud Index 2026
Typical SaaS horizontal price elasticity range-0.5 a -1.5Getmonetizely Elasticity Methods 2024
Enterprise SaaS with outcome-based elements by 202640-60%Gartner Forecast 2025

Frequently asked questions

1How do you calculate the optimal price for a SaaS?
Start from value: how much your customer saves or earns per month with your product. Price at 10-20% of that value for strong retention; 30%+ if switching cost is high. Triangulate with a cost floor (unit cost x 4-10), a competitive ceiling, and Van Westendorp on your ICP.
2What is price elasticity in subscriptions?
Elasticity = % change in subscribers / % change in price. |E| > 1 = elastic (raising price drops revenue); |E| < 1 = inelastic (raising price lifts revenue). Typical SaaS range: -0.8 to -1.8 horizontal, -0.3 to -0.7 vertical mission-critical.
3How does a price increase affect churn?
Expect +1 to +3 pp of annual churn in the announcement cohort for a 10-15% raise, concentrated in the first 60 days. Grandfathering existing customers for 12 months typically cuts triggered churn ~40% (OpenView). Price-sensitive segments (entry, monthly) churn most.
4What SaaS pricing models exist (flat, tiered, usage, per-seat)?
Flat-rate, tiered (good-better-best), per-seat, usage-based, and hybrid (base + usage). In 2026 hybrid is growing fastest - Microsoft Copilot ($30/seat + AI credits) is the canonical template. OpenView: ~60% of new launches are hybrid.
5What is an acceptable SaaS churn rate?
Enterprise 0.5-1.0% monthly, mid-market 1-2%, SMB 3-7%, B2C 5-9%. NRR is the metric VCs watch: public median ~114%, best-in-class 120%+. GRR < 90% almost always signals a product or ICP problem, not a pricing one.
6How do you run a Van Westendorp test?
Survey 100-300 high-intent customers or prospects with four questions: at what price is it too expensive, expensive but worth it, a bargain, and so cheap you doubt the quality. Plot cumulative curves; the intersection of 'too expensive' and 'bargain' is the optimal price point (OPP). Pair with Gabor-Granger for a sharper curve.
7What are MRR and ARR?
MRR = monthly recurring revenue from all active subscriptions. ARR = MRR x 12, annualized run rate. Report MRR in growth reviews (captures monthly changes) and ARR in board decks (tied to valuation multiple). Exclude one-time fees, implementation, and professional services.
8How do you segment customers by willingness to pay?
Cross value metric (seats, usage, endpoints) with industry, company size, and region. Run Van Westendorp by segment. Subscribers who have already expanded usage 2x+ typically pay 20-35% more than the median without lifting churn. New logos are 2-3x more elastic than customers of 12+ months.
9When should you raise prices on a SaaS?
Every 12-18 months for B2B. The median reviews every 2.4 years - too slow. Raise when three signals align: your delivered value exceeds the price by 20%+, the competition is above you, and your NRR is already above 100% - so the existing base absorbs the change.
10How do you calculate subscriber LTV?
LTV (contribution-margin flavor) = ARPU x gross margin / monthly churn. With ARPU $250, margin 78%, and churn 2% monthly: LTV = $250 x 0.78 / 0.02 = $9,750. Dropping churn to 1.5% lifts LTV to $13,000 - +33% from 0.5 pp of retention.

Tools from the same topical cluster. Use them together to close the loop on your analysis.

Last updated: April 30, 2026 · Reviewed by the Simúlalo editorial team. Figures and benchmarks are indicative; verify with your own data before deciding.

View methodology

How this simulator was reviewed

What you'll see, what it prevents, and where you shouldn't trust it

Every simulator on Simúlalo ships with the same editorial structure: two hypothetical worked examples with numbers, the errors it helps you avoid, the model's declared limitations, and a visible financial disclaimer. The review is signed and dated.

Hypothetical caseCase A

A SaaS that adds a middle tier and lifts ARPU 27% without losing conversion

A B2B SaaS had two tiers: Basic ($29/mo) and Enterprise ($299/mo). 78% of users were on Basic, 6% on Enterprise. The simulator models a new 'Pro' tier at $89/mo with features that move the Basic ceiling. Under assumed migration of 22% from Basic to Pro and 35% from Enterprise to Pro, ARPU rises from $48 to $61 (+27%), MRR improves 19% in 6 months, and churn stays at 4.2%. LTV:CAC moves from 3.1x to 4.0x. The decision: launch Pro with a 90-day guarantee and measure real migration.

Illustrative figures. Does not represent a real company or an investment recommendation.

Hypothetical caseCase B

A fintech that rejects a 'Lite' tier with projected LTV:CAC of 2.1x

A personal finance fintech had a single tier ($199 MXN/mo) with 6.8% churn, $940 CAC, and $2,920 LTV (LTV:CAC 3.1x). To grow the funnel top, they evaluate a 'Lite' tier at $79/mo with expected churn of 9.5% (worse cohort quality). The simulator projects LTV of $1,420 and CAC of $670 (cheaper channels). LTV:CAC = 2.1x — below the 3x floor the committee set. The decision: reject the Lite tier and focus on improving conversion of the current tier with onboarding.

Illustrative figures. Does not represent a real company or an investment recommendation.

Common mistakes it helps you avoid

Things a team or decision-maker might assume that this simulator forces you to verify before committing.

  • Calculating LTV with gross margin only and not subtracting cost-to-serve: the simulator requires declaring variable support and ops cost per active user.
  • Assuming average churn: the cheapest tier's churn is typically 1.5-2x the high tier's, and mixing them paints a false picture.
  • Comparing prices across products without normalizing for feature parity: two competitors 'at $99' may charge for features that sit in your high tier.
  • Ignoring the upgrade path: real LTV includes users who migrate from Basic to Pro to Enterprise; the simulator lets you model that chain.

Model limitations

What the simulator does not do, and where you need a professional or a specialized tool.

  • Does not query your Stripe or CRM. ARPU, churn, cost-to-serve, and CAC are declared by you using real cohorts.
  • Models tiered pricing (Basic, Pro, Enterprise). Does not model usage-based pricing or one-off negotiated enterprise prices.
  • Migration elasticities are assumptions. You need to validate with a real experiment (A/B cohorts) before committing.
  • Does not predict virality or network effects. If your LTV depends on a social component, the model underestimates it.

When NOT to use this simulator

If your model is 100% usage-based, or if your pricing is negotiated individually for each enterprise account, this simulator does not capture reality. For usage-based, model average ARPU under consumption distributions in a separate sheet; for negotiated enterprise, use the contribution margin per contract calculator. Reopen the simulator when you have fixed self-serve tiers.

Financial notice

Results are illustrative estimates and do not constitute financial, tax, accounting, or legal advice. Use the results as a reference point and validate important decisions with a certified professional.

Editorial review

Reviewed by the Simúlalo editorial team

This simulator was reviewed by the people listed below before being published. The review covers the declared formula, the model's assumptions, the explicit limitations, and the absence of unsupported financial claims.

They are part of the Simúlalo editorial team, focused on building financial tools that are clear, educational, and easy to interpret.

Last updated: We update this page when the methodology, sources used, or simulator structure change.

This tool uses standard financial formulas and user-supplied data. To explain concepts like rates, credit, risk, or cash flow we consult public and official sources (Banxico, SAT, CONDUSEF, CNBV, Banco de España, IFRS, BIS, among others). Simúlalo is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or endorsed by these institutions.