One number that says whether a software company is growing responsibly or just growing.
The Rule of 40 is a guideline for software companies: revenue growth rate plus profit margin should be at least 40%. It captures the trade-off between growing fast and being profitable, allowing low margins if growth is high, or slow growth if margins are strong. Either is fine. Neither is not.
Software companies can buy growth. Spend enough on sales and marketing and revenue will rise, whether or not the underlying business deserves it. The Rule of 40 exists to price that trade honestly: you may run negative margins, provided the growth you bought with them is large enough to justify the spending.
A company growing 60% with a margin of minus 20% scores 40 and passes. So does one growing 10% with a 30% margin. Both are coherent strategies. A company growing 15% with a minus 10% margin scores 5, and the question that follows is what exactly the money is being spent on.
Three companies, each measured on free cash flow margin.
Hypergrowth: 85% growth + (−45%) margin = 40 pass
Growth: 20% growth + 20% margin = 40 pass
Maturity: 10% growth + 30% margin = 40 pass
All three score identically and are completely different businesses at different points in their lives. That is the rule working as intended: it is a test of coherence, not of quality.
The rule does not specify, which is its biggest practical weakness. Companies pick the definition that flatters them, and EBITDA margin is the most flattering because it excludes stock-based compensation, which for software is an enormous real cost paid in shareholder ownership.
Free cash flow margin is the most honest choice for an outside investor, and operating margin is a reasonable second. Whichever you pick, apply it consistently across every company you compare, and be suspicious when a company quotes its own Rule of 40 score without saying which margin it used.
Forty is the pass mark, not the target. In practice the distribution matters more than the threshold: scores cluster low, so consistently exceeding 40 puts a company well into the upper part of the field, and a score above 60 is genuinely rare.
Consistency counts for more than any single reading. A company that scores 55 one year and 20 the next has not demonstrated anything except volatility. Four or five years above 40 says the economics are structural.
The same score of 40 describes three completely different companies. This is what each one looks like, with the traits and public examples of each, and where the benchmark quartiles fall.
Hypergrowth, growth and maturity in this graphic map onto the lifecycle phases, and the score means something different in each. Phase Check places any US-listed company on that curve and names the metric that matters most where it sits.
Try Phase Check freeNo credit card. One check without an account, unlimited with a free one.
Stock Simplifier walks you through these steps for any stock, filling in real data at every one and explaining each concept as it comes up. You review it, score it, and reach your own conclusion. Every analysis is saved so you can check later whether your thesis still holds.
Free forever. No credit card · Upgrade anytime.