funnel-audit

name	funnel-audit
description	Audit existing sales funnels against RMBC and CRO best practices — score each step, identify conversion leaks, and output a prioritized fix matrix.
model	sonnet
user-invocable	true

funnel-audit

Purpose

Audit an existing DTC sales funnel against RMBC methodology and CRO best practices. Every funnel leaks revenue somewhere — the question is where and how much. This skill evaluates each step in the funnel (traffic → landing → order → upsell → thank you → email) with per-step scoring across five dimensions. Output: a funnel health score (0-100), identification of the top 3 conversion leaks, and a prioritized fix matrix ranked by revenue impact.

Inputs

Input	Required	Description
funnel_description	Yes	Detailed description of each funnel step — pages, copy approach, offers, flow
funnel_type	Yes	One of: tripwire, webinar, vsl, quiz, free_plus_shipping, other
funnel_url	No	Live URL to audit (if available — describe what you observe at each step)
current_metrics	No	Existing performance data: conversion rates per step, AOV, CPA, ROAS, traffic volume

Execution Protocol

Step 1 — Load Framework Context

Read rmbc-context/SKILL.md to load RMBC framework definitions. Funnel auditing applies RMBC as a diagnostic lens — Research quality determines whether copy speaks to the right audience, Mechanism consistency determines whether the "why" threads through every page, Brief alignment determines whether each page has a clear strategic job, Copy execution determines whether the words convert.

Step 2 — Map the Funnel Steps

Identify every step in the funnel and classify it:

Step	Type	Examples
Traffic	Entry point	Ad, organic post, email, referral
Pre-sell	Warm-up	Advertorial, quiz, webinar
Landing	Core offer	Sales page, VSL page, product page
Order	Checkout	Order form, cart, payment page
Upsell	Post-purchase	OTO page, bump offer, cross-sell
Thank You	Confirmation	Order confirmation, next steps
Email	Follow-up	Welcome sequence, onboarding, ascension

If a step is missing from the funnel, flag it as a structural gap.

Step 3 — Score Each Step

Evaluate each funnel step across 5 dimensions. Score each dimension 0-20 points:

Dimension	What It Measures	0-5	6-10	11-15	16-20
Message Match	Does the copy match what the prospect expects from the previous step?	No connection	Loose match	Good match	Seamless transition
Friction Level	How many obstacles stand between the prospect and the conversion goal?	High friction, confusing	Multiple friction points	Minor friction	Frictionless path
Proof Density	Is there sufficient, varied evidence to support the claims being made?	No proof	Single proof type	Multiple proof types	Stacked, specific proof
CTA Clarity	Is the desired action obvious, compelling, and easy to take?	No clear CTA	Vague or buried CTA	Clear CTA	Urgent, specific, visible CTA
Mobile Experience	Does the page work well on mobile (80-90% of DTC traffic)?	Broken on mobile	Functional but poor	Good mobile layout	Mobile-first design

Per-step score: Sum of 5 dimensions (0-100 per step) Funnel health score: Average across all steps (0-100)

Step 4 — Identify Conversion Leaks

Rank all steps by their scores. The bottom 3 are the primary leaks. For each leak:

1. The leak — Which step and what's failing
2. Revenue impact — Estimate how much revenue this leak costs (if metrics provided, calculate; if not, estimate based on typical benchmarks)
3. Root cause — RMBC diagnosis: is it a Research failure (wrong audience assumptions), Mechanism failure (weak "why"), Brief failure (unclear page strategy), or Copy failure (poor execution)?
4. Benchmark gap — Compare the step's performance to industry benchmarks for this funnel type

Step 5 — Build Fix Priority Matrix

Prioritize fixes by: (Revenue Impact × Ease of Fix). Score both 1-5:

• Revenue Impact (1-5): How much revenue will fixing this recover?
• Ease of Fix (1-5): How quickly can this be implemented? (5 = copy change, 1 = rebuild)
• Priority Score: Impact × Ease (highest score = fix first)

Output Format

## Funnel Audit: [Funnel Name/Product]

**Funnel Type:** [type]
**Steps Audited:** [count]
**Funnel Health Score:** XX/100
**Grade:** [A (80+) | B (60-79) | C (40-59) | D (20-39) | F (0-19)]

---

### STEP-BY-STEP SCORES

| Step | Message Match | Friction | Proof | CTA | Mobile | Total |
|------|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|:---:|
| [Step 1] | /20 | /20 | /20 | /20 | /20 | /100 |
| [Step 2] | /20 | /20 | /20 | /20 | /20 | /100 |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

---

### TOP 3 CONVERSION LEAKS

#### Leak 1: [Step Name] — Score: XX/100
- **What's failing:** [description]
- **Revenue impact:** [estimated or calculated]
- **Root cause:** [RMBC diagnosis]
- **Benchmark gap:** [current vs expected]

#### Leak 2: [Step Name] — Score: XX/100
[same format]

#### Leak 3: [Step Name] — Score: XX/100
[same format]

---

### FIX PRIORITY MATRIX

| Rank | Fix | Step | Impact (1-5) | Ease (1-5) | Priority | Estimated Lift |
|:---:|------|------|:---:|:---:|:---:|------|
| 1 | [fix description] | [step] | X | X | XX | +X% conversion |
| 2 | [fix description] | [step] | X | X | XX | +X% conversion |
| 3 | [fix description] | [step] | X | X | XX | +X% conversion |
| ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... |

---

### STRUCTURAL GAPS

[List any missing funnel steps that should exist but don't]

---

### SUMMARY

- **Biggest win:** [single highest-impact fix]
- **Quick wins:** [fixes with Ease score of 4-5]
- **Requires rebuild:** [fixes with Ease score of 1-2]

Quality Criteria

• Every funnel step must be scored — no skipping steps because they "seem fine"

• Scores must be justified with specific observations, not just numbers

• Revenue impact estimates must show reasoning (conversion rate × traffic × AOV)

• Fix priority matrix must rank by Impact × Ease — not by gut feeling

• Structural gaps must be flagged even if the user didn't mention them

• Mobile experience must be evaluated for every step — it's not optional for DTC

• RMBC root cause diagnosis must map to a specific phase failure, not generic "copy is weak"

• Specificity gate: Every finding must include a number, name, or timeframe — no "needs work" or "could improve"

• Mechanism quantification: When referencing the mechanism, include at least one specific data point (number, timeframe, study reference)

• Audience journey: Each finding must reference where the reader IS (what they've tried, what's failing) — not just who they are demographically

• Proof diversity: Use at least 2 different proof types (testimonial, statistical, authority, case study) — do not rely on a single proof mode

Related Skills

• Run /funnel-architecture to design the ideal funnel this audit compares against
• Run /lander-copy to rewrite a low-scoring landing page
• Run /order-form-cro to fix checkout conversion leaks
• Run /upsell-script to improve upsell page scores
• Run /thank-you-page to optimize the confirmation step
• Validate individual pages with /rmbc-copy-audit

Attribution

Generated using RMBC framework by Stefan Georgi. Learn more: copyaccelerator.com/join