← Back to articles

Gross Margin by Business Model: What's Good, What's Bad, What's a Problem



Author: Yanni Papoutsi · Fractional VP of Finance and Strategy for early-stage startups · Author, *Raise Ready*

Published: 2025-03-08 · Last updated: 2025-03-08

Reading time: \~7 min

Why Gross Margin Benchmarks Differ So Much

Gross margin reflects how much revenue remains after the direct cost of delivering the product or service. Because delivery costs differ fundamentally across business models, the benchmark ranges are wide. A pure SaaS business delivers software through infrastructure that costs a fraction of the revenue it generates. A marketplace with fulfilment operations delivers a service that requires significant people, logistics, or compliance costs with every transaction. A professional services firm delivers through human labour that is expensive relative to the revenue billed.

The benchmark is not about which model is better. It is about understanding what the unit economics look like for each model at scale, and whether the current gross margin is on a trajectory toward those benchmarks.

Gross Margin Benchmarks by Business Model

Pure SaaS | 70-80% | 80-85% | 60-70% | < 60% SaaS with services | 55-70% | 70-75% | 45-55% | < 45% Usage-based SaaS | 65-80% | 80%+ | 55-65% | < 55% Marketplace (take rate) | 60-75% | 75%+ | 50-60% | < 50% Marketplace with | 40-55% | 55-65% | 30-40% | < 30% operations

E-commerce (own | 35-50% | 50%+ | 25-35% | < 25% inventory)

Professional services | 25-40% | 40-50% | 15-25% | < 15% Hardware + software | 45-60% | 60%+ | 35-45% | < 35%

What Drives the Range Within Each Model

For SaaS:

The primary variable is the ratio of product-only revenue to professional services revenue. A SaaS business with 20% of revenue from implementation and customisation services will show lower gross margin than a pure product business, because services delivery is more labour-intensive. The trend matters too --- is gross margin improving as the product matures and services become a smaller proportion of revenue? For marketplaces:

The primary variables are take rate and fulfilment intensity. A marketplace that takes 20% of transaction value on a fully automated platform has very different gross margin potential from one that takes 15% but employs an operations team to manage supply-side compliance and matching. The distinction between a "thin" platform and an "operated" marketplace is one of the most important structural choices for long-term gross margin.

For professional services:

The primary variables are utilisation rate and leverage ratio (junior staff per senior). Higher utilisation and higher leverage typically improve gross margin. The ceiling is lower than in product businesses because the cost of delivery scales directly with revenue. For hardware + software:

The blended gross margin depends on the relative weight of hardware and software revenue. Hardware gross margins are often 30-50%; software gross margins are 70-85%. As the software attach rate increases, blended margins improve significantly.

When High Gross Margin Is a Red Flag

Above-benchmark gross margin is not always a positive signal. It triggers the question: has COGS been correctly classified? The most common COGS misclassifications that inflate gross margin: Engineering time building new features classified as COGS instead of

R&D

Customer success team entirely in Sales and Marketing rather than

partially in COGS

Payment processing fees in OpEx rather than COGS

Infrastructure costs allocated to G&A rather than COGS

A SaaS business showing 90% gross margin when the benchmark is 70-80% will be asked these questions in diligence. If the answer is that the model is correctly classified and the business genuinely has very low infrastructure costs, that is worth explaining. If the answer is a COGS misclassification, fix it before the model is shared.

When Low Gross Margin Is a Red Flag

Below-benchmark gross margin triggers a different set of questions: is there a credible path to the benchmark, and what is the mechanism? The three legitimate explanations for below-benchmark gross margin: Early-stage scale effects. Fixed COGS are high relative to revenue at low scale. As revenue grows, the fixed cost component dilutes and gross margin improves. This is the most common explanation and is acceptable if the model shows the trajectory clearly.

Business model complexity. Some businesses operate at below-typical gross margins because their model involves more direct fulfilment than typical peers. A marketplace that takes more operational risk to guarantee quality may show lower gross margins than a pure-platform peer but generates more defensible supply relationships as a result. Intentional investment. A startup deliberately keeping delivery quality high (even at elevated cost) during the early customer acquisition phase, with a plan to reduce unit delivery costs at scale, should explain this explicitly.

What is not a legitimate explanation: "we expect gross margin to improve as we scale" without a model that shows the mechanism for that improvement.

The Gross Margin Trajectory Test

Investors reviewing a multi-year financial model will check whether gross margin improves over the forecast period and whether the mechanism is explained.

The test: if gross margin in year one is 45% and year five is 65%, the model should be able to explain:

Which COGS lines are fixed vs. variable?

What happens to fixed COGS per unit as revenue scales?

What negotiated rate improvements occur at volume?

What operational efficiencies reduce per-transaction costs? Each of these should be a named assumption in the model, not an implicit improvement baked into a declining cost percentage.

Summary

Gross margin benchmarks are model-specific and trajectory-dependent. Know the benchmark for your business model. If gross margin is above benchmark, be ready to explain why COGS classification is correct. If it is below benchmark, be ready to explain the mechanism for improvement and show it in the model. The gross margin question in investor diligence is not just "what is your margin" --- it is "do you understand what drives it, why it is where it is, and where it is going?"