Benchmark
Containment rate benchmark — how your number compares to production bands
Two deployments quoting the same containment rate can differ by 30 percentage points on a like-for-like comparison. This tool walks through the five most common methodology adjustments and lands on a defensible number to compare against production bands.
Your measurement
Result
Defensibly adjusted
43%
Adjusted from a reported 65% by applying the methodology corrections above. Most vendor headlines sit 15–30 percentage points above their defensibly measured equivalent.
Closest production band
Mixed intent mix
30–50% typical range
Billing questions, account changes, scheduling. Resolution requires multi-step action and integrations behave as the differentiator.
Bands
Transactional intent mix60–80%
Mixed intent mix30–50%
Complex intent mix10–30%
Methodology notes
The adjustments above approximate the gap between vendor-headline containment and a defensibly measured rate. Specific numbers vary by deployment; the directional gap is consistent.
- Short-abandon exclusion typically lifts the headline by 3–5 points.
- Out-of-hours exclusion typically lifts it by 2–4 points.
- Pre-routed exclusion typically lifts it by 5–10 points.
- Counting all non-transfers as contained typically lifts it by 5–10 points.
- Ignoring 7-day re-contact typically lifts it by 5–12 points.