Unit economy calculator 2026 - CM1, CM2 and where is the leak
Calculate unit economy per minute: CM1, CM2, contribution margin%. You see where the money is flowing - to COGS, to CAC or to retention - before the agency shows it on the report.
What is a unit-economy for a marketer - and why they are afraid of it
Unit economics is not a financial report. This is a one line check: “Is it even possible to make money on this product at the current CAC.” Take it one sale, you calculate its revenue minus cost minus share marketing. If the result is a positive number, the product can grow. If it’s a minus, every next sale takes away money, and no optimizing Yandex Direct will not cure this.
Marketers have a complex relationship with unit-economy. Most consider CPA and ROAS, because these numbers are in advertising accounts - I pressed the button and you see. And in unit-economy you need to go to COGS (this is for finance), in frequency (this is for the product), to returns (this is for support). Therefore marketing opens a unit-economy when the product is already falling - and discovers that the campaign was unprofitable for three months not because CPA increased, but because COGS increased by 18% due to a change in supplier, and no one counted.
If you want a short terminology, I have unit-economics in the glossary with a base and connections with other metrics. Further on this page I will assume that the term is clear.
Formula CM1 vs CM2 - the main confusion
In unit-economy there are two main numbers - CM1 and CM2 (Contribution Margin 1 and 2). They get confused most often, even though they think different things.
CM1 = revenue − direct COGS. How much is left after product”, without even subtracting marketing. This is the structural margin of the product: cheap produce - high CM1, expensive - low.
CM2 = CM1 − marketing cost (CAC divided by the number of customer purchases). This is the real “contribution” of one sale to covering fixed costs. CM2 is the main number I look at first.
CM1 = AOV − COGS
CM2 = CM1 − (CAC ÷ frequency)
CM2% = CM2 ÷ AOV × 100
Example (e-com):
AOV = 3,500 ₽
COGS = 2,200 ₽
CM1 = 3,500 − 2,200 = 1,300 ₽
CAC = 1,500 ₽, frequency = 2.5 purchases per life
CAC for purchase = 1,500 ÷ 2.5 = 600 ₽
CM2 = 1,300 − 600 = 700 ₽
CM2% = 700 ÷ 3,500 = 20%This arithmetic looks primitive until you start substituting real numbers. The most common problem on my projects is frequency. B in the business plan they write “the client buys 4 times,” but according to the actual cohort after 12 months - 1.8. This means that CAC is not smeared by 4 purchases, but by 1.8, and CM2 on each sale immediately drops by 50-60%.
Why positive CM2 does not mean profit
This is the second point that is most often mistaken. CM2 positive - and the team calms down: “we are in the black, we can pour more.” This dangerous simplification.
CM2 is contribution one sale to cover fixed costs (rent, team salaries, infrastructure, accounting). Only when the amount of all CM2 for the period covered all fixed costs - the profit went. If CM2 = 700 ₽, and fixed costs = 1,500,000 ₽/month, you need to make 2,142 sales in month to break even. And the profit will start from 2,143.
Therefore, the correct formulation is not “CM2 is positive → growing”, but «CM2 × volume > fixed costs → growing”. And the second part depends not on the calculator, but on whether marketing can provide the required volume for this CAC. At low volumes, CAC is usually low (good CM2), on a scale it grows - and CM2 sags faster than volume increases.
CM benchmarks for Russian niches 2026
The numbers in the table are the median CM2% for my six projects over the past two years plus correspondence with twelve colleagues at Performance and Products This is not a “McKinsey report”, this is a live sample of Russian-speaking market, end of 2025 - beginning of 2026.
| Niche | Top 25% (higher) | Median CM % | Weak (lower) |
|---|---|---|---|
E-com (clothing/accessories) CM2 after marketing | 20% | 11% | 3% |
FMCG / Retail thin margin, volume decides | 14% | 7% | 1% |
B2B SaaS (subscription) high margins, low COGS | 62% | 42% | 22% |
B2B services depends on the command load | 42% | 26% | 10% |
Local services including rent and salaries | 35% | 20% | 7% |
Online education (courses) after returns and refunds | 48% | 30% | 14% |
Medicine (clinics) consumables + staff | 32% | 18% | 6% |
The main asymmetry of the table: B2B SaaS median 45%, FMCG - 8%. The difference is six times. It's not "SaaS is six times better than FMCG." It's a different structure COGS: in SaaS, the variable cost per subscription is the server, support and payment in the amount of 8-15% of revenue. In FMCG, the product itself is worth 70-85% of the check. Therefore, in FMCG you can fight for CM only in volume and reduction in COGS, and in SaaS - due to retention (frequency) and LTV.
The “Education” niche is a separate case. Median 32%, but taking into account returns according to the 14-day rule, the real CM2 drops by 5-8 points. In the calculator above, the education preset already takes into account 12% returns - this is close to the market norm.
Red flags in unit-economy
Five signs that the unit economy is “drawn” and not calculated. On audits I see at least one of them 80% of the time.
CM1 is positive, CM2 is negative. This means that the product itself makes money, but marketing eats up everything margin. It is treated not by optimizing unit-economy, but by reducing CAC - through creatives, landing page, LAL. More details in CPA calculator - there three levers for reduction were disassembled.
CM2 positive in the 1-2 month cohort, negative further. Retention is leaking: clients do the first purchase, then they are not returned. CAC decomposes to a smaller frequency than planned - CM2 is on the horizon for the client’s entire life goes into minus. This is a classic disease of e-com and education.
The growth of CM2% is accompanied by a fall in revenue. This means that the team is cutting costs (reduced CAC, simplified the product, they cut down the assortment), but it’s not growing. CM2 is beautiful on paper, in practice business is declining. After 6-9 months, such “optimization” leads to collapse: fixed costs remain, volume falls, total profit minus.
CM2 positive on average, but half of cohorts unprofitable. Hospital average. If the cohort “Moscow / Yandex Direct" gives CM2 = +1,200 ₽, and the cohort "regions / VK Ads" — −400 ₽, plus on average. But the regions are dragging the budget into the red, and it It must either be disabled or dealt with separately. Without cohort unit-economy analysis is accounting, not management.
CM2 is calculated without taking into account returns and refunds. The most frequent and dull. The report includes “placed orders”, but COGS does not include returns. Real CM2 is 10-20% lower than in the plate. B The calculator above has a separate “Returns” slider - it automatically reduces net revenue, the figures are immediately recalculated.
How to grow CM2 - four levers
CM2 is four variables: AOV, COGS, CAC and frequency. There are no others. Any “work on unit-economy” comes down to one of these four levers. I arrange them by complexity and speed of return.
Lever 1: AOV - cross-sell, upsell, sets
The fastest lever. You can raise the average bill by 15-20% in a month without traffic changes. What works: product sets (I sell more than one product, but a set), upsell at checkout (offer “pay extra 500 ₽ - get premium"), cross-sell in a letter after purchase. AOV growth immediately increases both CM1 and CM2, without any increase in CAC.
Lever 2: COGS - Suppliers, Logistics, Packaging
Marketing's Most Underrated Lever Because It's Out of Zone marketing. But reducing COGS by 10% has the same effect as increasing AOV by 10%, and works on all cohorts at once. Best points: negotiations with supplier (volume has increased - ask for a discount), logistics consolidation (one courier instead of three), refusal of part of the packaging. On my projects the biggest win came from changing the payment method: YuKassa vs the alternative gave 0.5-1.2% difference in commission, and this is on the COGS side turned into +200-400 ₽ CM2 on a check of 35,000 ₽.
Lever 3: CAC - landing page, creatives, audience
Reducing CAC means working with the acquisition funnel. Landing page first (CR from 1.5% to 2.5% gives −40% to CAC), then creatives (8x difference in CTR between the best and the worst), then the audience (LAL for paying people vs wide target). I discussed this in detail in LTV/CAC benchmarks for the Russian Federation 2026 — there is a step-by-step methodology and specific numbers from my campaigns.
Lever 4: Frequency - retention, loyalty programs
The slowest lever, but the most powerful in terms of unit-economy. If frequency increased from 2.5 to 3.5 purchases, CAC spreads to more denominator, and CM2 grows without any optimization of other metrics. What works: email chains after the first purchase, loyalty program with accumulation of points, remarketing to those who purchased (not to those who refused), push notifications in the application. Related to retention in glossary - there The difference between retention and frequency is discussed.
When unit economy is negative - three scenarios
CM2 in the red is not a death sentence, but it’s not “optimizing the campaign, Let's wait." There are three working scenarios and the choice between them is a strategic decision, not a marketing one.
Scenario A. The product does not scale - change the model. If CM2 is negative even with ideal CAC and maximum frequency, the problem is in the business model itself. Check too low, COGS too high, or the market is not willing to pay that much. There is no treatment marketing, but pivot: we change the segment, raise prices, enter another niche with better economics.
Scenario B. Grow on investments, pay off in cohorts through 12-18 months. This is how SaaS startups and large companies grow educational platforms. CM2 of the first purchase is negative, but retention of 12-24 months gives a total plus. Condition: clear runway (money for 18-24 months) and LTV/CAC ≥ 3 over a long horizon. If these two conditions do not exist - this is not a unit-economic strategy, this is hope.
Scenario B. Switch from paid to organic. If C.A.C. eats up the entire unit economy, the only way to survive is to reduce the share paid traffic and complete organic channels: SEO, content, sundress, referral. It's slow (horizon 9-18 months), but Organic CAC on my projects is usually 3-5 times lower than paid. CM2 on organic traffic becomes positive even with the same COGS and AOV.
Unit-economy and LTV/CAC connection
Unit economy and LTV/CAC are two related but different metrics. Marketers they are regularly confused.
Unit-economy counts as “one step” - one purchase or for one subscription. This is the micro level: “are we making money on this specific sale."
LTV/CAC counts as “the entire customer journey” - the total revenue over the customer's lifetime divided by the cost of attracting him. This is a macro level: “will the client pay off in the long term for his entire life."
Why are both needed: unit-economy catches problems now (if CM2 is negative — you can’t wait, the campaign is on fire), LTV/CAC catches problems on the horizon (if LTV/CAC = 1.5 - even with positive CM2 the model will not survive scaling). I look at unit-economy every week, LTV/CAC - once every month on cohorts.
If you want to calculate LTV/CAC, I have it separate LTV/CAC calculator with the same benchmarks for niches of the Russian Federation 2026 and an analysis of why the “standard 3:1" is a myth.
Unit-economy is not a financial report. This is the question “is it worth it at all?” spend marketing on it.” If CM2 is in the red, any optimization campaigns are an acceleration in the wrong direction.