Lead to opportunity conversion
The share of marketing-qualified leads that sales accepts and works.
01 What it is
Why anyone looks at this number
The share of marketing-qualified leads that sales accepts and works.
It is the handover point where most funnels leak, and the one number that both marketing and sales have to agree on.
02 The formula
How it is worked out
Lead to opportunity conversion = leads_accepted_as_opportunities ÷ qualified_leads grain : month × channel × segment unit : percentage source : Marketing automation joined to CRM
The definition of "qualified" has to be one shared, written rule. Where marketing and sales keep separate definitions, this metric measures the disagreement rather than the funnel.
03 Worked example
The same number, with real inputs
| Qualified leads | 320 |
| Accepted as opportunities | 26 |
| Calculation | 26 ÷ 320 |
| Result | 8.1% |
Nine in ten leads are rejected. Either the bar is wrong or nobody is calling them — and the rejection reasons will say which.
04 What moves it
Four things that actually change this number
Lead definition
The agreed bar, and whether it is enforced.
Speed of follow-up
Response time is the strongest single predictor of acceptance.
Channel
Inbound intent converts far better than list-sourced contacts.
Sales capacity
Busy teams reject more, which looks like a lead quality problem.
05 Where the number lives
The system, the record and the fields
| System of record | Key record | Fields you need |
|---|---|---|
| Marketing automation joined to CRM | Lead joined to Opportunity | lead_score, mql_date, accepted_date, rejection_reason, source |
The definition of "qualified" has to be one shared, written rule. Where marketing and sales keep separate definitions, this metric measures the disagreement rather than the funnel.
06 How it goes wrong
Three ways this metric misleads people
No rejection reasons
Sales rejects and nobody learns why, so the same leads keep coming.
Fix: Make the reason mandatory, with a short controlled list.Ignoring response time
Leads decay in hours; a weekly review guarantees a poor conversion rate.
Fix: Measure time to first contact alongside.Blaming one side
Marketing blames follow-up, sales blames quality, and the definition never gets fixed.
Fix: Write one shared definition and review the rejections together monthly.08 Questions
Frequently asked
What is a healthy conversion rate here?
It depends entirely on where you set the bar. A tight definition with 30% acceptance is far healthier than a loose one with 8%. Judge the trend and the pipeline it produces.
Who should own this metric?
Both functions jointly. It is the only metric that measures a handover, so single ownership guarantees it gets optimised from one side.
One definition, everywhere it is used
SCIKIQ stores this metric once and serves it to every dashboard, board pack and agent that asks.