How to build a bottom-up sales forecast
A bottom-up forecast is built from individual deals and reps upward, rather than allocated from a company target downward. It captures ground truth that top-down models miss, but because it aggregates individual judgment, it needs a top-down and historical check to catch bias.
Short answer
Build a bottom-up sales forecast by having each rep forecast their own deals from the ground up, rolling those into team and region totals, then reconciling the sum against a top-down target and historical conversion. It captures deal-level reality but must be checked against history to remove individual rep bias.
Step by step
Have reps forecast their own deals
Each rep assesses their deals individually: likelihood, timing, and value, based on real buyer signals.
Roll up to team and region
Aggregate rep forecasts into team, region, and company totals so the number is built from the deals up.
- Rep-level deal forecasts roll into team totals
- Categorize into commit and best case
- Reconcile the sum against top-down and history
Categorize consistently
Apply the same commit and best-case definitions across all reps so the rolled-up categories are comparable.
Reconcile against top-down and history
Compare the bottom-up sum to the company target and to what historical conversion predicts. Investigate large gaps.
Adjust for known bias
Apply a correction for reps with a track record of sandbagging or over-committing, based on their measured accuracy.
How Ardovo helps
Ardovo rolls rep-level deal forecasts into team and company totals, reconciles them against top-down targets and historical conversion, and applies per-rep accuracy history so Rook can flag where the bottom-up number is likely biased high or low.
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between bottom-up and top-down forecasting?
Bottom-up builds the forecast from individual deals and reps upward, capturing deal-level reality. Top-down allocates a target down from company goals or market size. Bottom-up is more grounded but carries rep bias; top-down is fast but abstract. Reconcile both.
Why reconcile a bottom-up forecast against history?
Because a bottom-up forecast aggregates individual judgment, which carries bias: some reps sandbag, others have happy ears. Checking the rolled-up number against historical conversion rates catches systematic bias that individual optimism or caution introduces.
Which is more accurate, bottom-up or top-down?
Bottom-up is usually more accurate for near-term periods because it reflects actual deals, while top-down is better for long-range planning. The most reliable forecasts reconcile the two so each checks the other, rather than relying on one alone.