Portfolio — Apartment management app revenue

Apartment management app revenue

As of

Monthly recurring revenue: 2.8억
Year over year: +40.5%
Penetration of addressable: 4.7%
Gross revenue churn: 20.4%
New against churned: ×3

Monthly recurring revenue

A step, not a line. A per-household fee times a household count that does not change is the same number every month until the contract changes, and joining the points with straight segments draws a climb through values the business never billed. That growth arrives in discrete signings is what the step carries.

Usage billings, on their own scale

Revenue movement

The line above cannot lie about its own shape but it can hide what is under it. Subscription revenue rises in all thirty-six months while a substantial share of the closing balance left over the same window. New business covers it every month. How much left is what these columns say.

New · winback · expansion
Contraction · churn

Read as numbers

Thirty-six months of subscription revenue as a stepped area. It rises in every month, with usage billings on their own scale beneath it.
Month	Subscription	Usage	Complexes	New	Winback	Expansion	Churn
202309	81,994,678	2,526,930	293	2,631,018	0	411,070	1,863,008
202310	87,943,268	4,490,520	314	5,342,310	200,800	405,480	0
202311	93,463,640	7,221,210	335	5,468,812	0	893,380	841,820
202312	98,867,552	6,332,430	350	4,300,204	0	1,392,288	288,580
202401	102,310,662	2,383,005	364	3,718,680	99,600	868,730	1,243,900
202402	105,674,152	1,718,685	381	2,876,180	0	996,470	509,160
202403	110,527,664	1,949,295	388	4,030,112	0	2,212,480	1,389,080
202404	111,491,530	2,092,545	398	3,266,552	0	885,280	3,187,966
202405	115,783,122	1,936,035	418	6,139,492	0	377,840	2,225,740
202406	120,020,626	3,218,115	431	4,025,558	163,560	1,338,866	1,290,480
202407	121,789,632	1,965,615	430	5,259,902	0	1,322,660	4,813,556
202408	126,374,436	2,389,395	443	4,944,224	0	1,165,920	1,525,340
202409	131,178,560	4,042,845	459	6,271,224	0	707,760	2,174,860
202410	142,014,282	6,687,165	490	11,680,942	0	479,720	1,324,940
202411	147,652,603	10,106,640	506	4,941,567	111,360	2,060,074	1,474,680
202412	155,391,439	12,655,905	521	8,443,520	0	1,313,764	2,018,448
202501	159,275,611	2,405,805	540	5,896,508	798,966	280,220	3,091,522
202502	168,334,287	4,032,240	556	11,441,616	0	1,062,420	3,445,360
202503	174,541,947	4,546,650	573	6,036,780	0	1,078,540	907,660
202504	178,922,137	4,117,185	588	3,860,440	0	2,217,660	1,697,910
202505	181,349,722	3,085,245	601	3,074,040	0	1,453,112	2,099,567
202506	189,432,494	3,471,165	626	5,858,220	0	3,443,012	1,218,460
202507	192,379,402	3,264,300	644	7,975,046	0	1,161,900	6,190,038
202508	201,459,874	3,599,295	667	7,766,584	0	1,488,288	174,400
202509	210,592,571	4,674,765	702	12,555,237	0	2,230,312	5,652,852
202510	214,057,191	7,128,390	719	5,822,476	50,000	1,464,180	3,872,036
202511	220,056,047	17,479,095	740	7,831,516	0	663,184	2,495,844
202512	226,493,100	16,041,600	769	6,157,767	0	1,382,200	1,102,914
202601	227,975,871	4,680,780	775	7,717,170	0	1,614,960	7,849,359
202602	235,623,836	4,858,605	801	8,141,839	236,080	1,787,146	2,517,100
202603	243,713,339	5,582,895	824	8,966,761	0	1,946,352	2,823,610
202604	252,425,943	7,604,205	856	9,098,174	564,800	2,547,750	3,498,120
202605	264,278,857	5,813,925	883	13,477,474	0	1,188,680	2,813,240
202606	271,478,265	4,012,335	913	7,227,400	0	1,693,428	1,721,420
202607	278,115,981	6,005,430	932	8,251,196	0	1,841,380	3,454,860
202608	283,116,862	7,238,100	952	6,600,380	0	1,649,304	3,248,803

Price per household falls as complexes grow

The bundle is held fixed and only household count varies. The realised tier averages cannot carry this claim: they mix the price structure with whatever those complexes happen to hold, and the largest tier has fewer than twenty accounts, so its average moves when one complex adds a service. Each bundle is therefore indexed to its own list price. The question is not what a bundle costs; it is how far, and in which direction, what a complex actually pays departs from the price list.

entry · notices only (list 150/household)
core · notices, collection, parking (list 950/household)

Dots mark where the monthly floor, not the rate card, set the price · x-axis is households

Read as numbers

Two reference bundles priced up a household ladder, each as a share of its own list rate. Both fall monotonically.
Households	entry	core
100	500*	950
150	333.3*	950
300	166.7*	950
400	150	950
600	150	950
900	150	950
1,200	147.5	934.2
2,000	142.5	902.5
4,000	132.8	840.8
6,000	129.5	820.2

What the tiers actually billed

Per complex on the left, per household on the right. The two run in opposite directions. A tier that departs from the ladder beside it is buying more or less than the reference bundle, which is a different finding and needs its own sample size — so the account count sits in the table.

Monthly revenue per complex

Monthly revenue per household

Read as numbers

What the tiers actually billed
Tier	Complexes	Households	Per complex	Per household	Floored
sub	72	6,186	76,528	890.7	52
small	363	90,428	157,219	631.1	61
mid	369	207,558	318,938	567	0
large	129	156,898	649,506	534	0
xlarge	19	51,448	1,384,207	511.2	0

Attach rate by service

Eleven panels rather than eleven hues. The site has two colours; eleven series on one axis would need nine more, and generating them puts pairs on the chart that a colourblind reader — or a monochrome printer — cannot separate. Faceting costs the ability to read one service against another at a glance and buys the ability to read each shape at all. The scale is the same in every panel: per-panel scaling would make a service almost nobody holds and one that more than half of them hold draw identical curves.

Parking control
41.3%
Visitor vehicles
5.6%
Resident access
13.4%
CCTV feed
17.5%
Fee collection
49.4%
Notices
58%
Facility booking
10%
Defect intake
3.6%
Parcel lockers
23.2%
Resident voting
23.5%
SMS fallback
9.5%

0 – 58.3%

Read as numbers

Attach rate over time for eleven services, faceted into eleven small panels on one shared scale.
Service	First	Last	Contracts
parking	43.7	41.3	393
visitor	4.1	5.6	53
access	10.6	13.4	128
cctv	12.6	17.5	167
billing	46.4	49.4	470
notice	54.3	58	552
community	11.6	10	95
defect	3.1	3.6	34
locker	19.8	23.2	221
vote	20.5	23.5	224
sms	4.4	9.5	90

Penetration by district

The same 245 hexagons the brokerage and price maps use, borrowed rather than recomputed: the one thing a reader should be able to assume about two maps on one site is that the same shape means the same place. The denominator is not every filed complex but the ones large enough to have a management office.

Class edges (%) and districts in each

0
0.5
2
5
10
20
None to sell to

Contracts and revenue are generated; the complexes and the household denominator are filed and estimated · ≥150

Read as numbers

Contracted complexes as a share of the addressable market, on a 245-cell hexagon cartogram in one hue and six classes.
District	Province	Addressable	Rate
합천군	경상남도	1	100
영덕군	경상북도	2	50
정선군	강원특별자치도	6	33.3
인제군	강원특별자치도	4	25
함양군	경상남도	4	25
서구	대구광역시	21	19
예천군	경상북도	12	16.7
과천시	경기도	21	14.3
가평군	경기도	17	11.8
홍성군	충청남도	35	11.4
하남시	경기도	124	11.3
강서구	부산광역시	49	10.2
서산시	충청남도	70	10
중구	부산광역시	10	10
안산시상록구	경기도	52	9.6
통영시	경상남도	52	9.6
성남시분당구	경기도	201	9.5
남구	대구광역시	44	9.1
문경시	경상북도	11	9.1
군포시	경기도	93	8.6
음성군	충청북도	48	8.3
중랑구	서울특별시	150	8
창원시진해구	경상남도	64	7.8
김제시	전북특별자치도	26	7.7
속초시	강원특별자치도	65	7.7
여주시	경기도	40	7.5
안양시동안구	경기도	149	7.4
동해시	강원특별자치도	55	7.3
부천시원미구	경기도	152	7.2
평택시	경기도	305	7.2
북구	울산광역시	112	7.1
함안군	경상남도	14	7.1
오산시	경기도	113	7.1
천안시동남구	충청남도	114	7
용인시수지구	경기도	215	7
창원시마산합포구	경상남도	86	7
서대문구	서울특별시	115	7
동래구	부산광역시	130	6.9
부천시오정구	경기도	29	6.9
수원시영통구	경기도	146	6.8

Cohort retention

A triangle rather than a grid, because that is the shape of the data: a cohort that signed two months before the window ends has two months of history and no more, and filling the rest with anything would invent it. Complexes still billing on the left; revenue against the cohort's own first month on the right. The two come apart, because the survivors buy more, and one grid cannot hold that gap.

Complexes still billing

Revenue against first month

Read as numbers

Cohort retention
Cohort	Size	Kept	Value
2023Q3	60	70	101.4
2023Q4	55	63.6	68
2024Q1	57	68.4	83.1
2024Q2	54	70.4	91.5
2024Q3	83	73.5	91.2
2024Q4	74	71.6	66.5
2025Q1	61	75.4	94.7
2025Q2	90	86.7	96.5
2025Q3	97	81.4	89.1
2025Q4	99	85.9	82.5
2026Q1	115	89.6	97.1
2026Q2	110	98.2	100

Quota attainment

The bars grow from the 100 line rather than from the left edge. From the left edge a rep just short of quota and one just past it draw almost the same bar and the sign disappears, which is the only thing the chart is for.

Read as numbers

Quota attainment per salesperson, as bars either side of the 100 per cent line.
Rep	Rank	Region	Accounts	Quota	Attainment
capital-2-2	junior	capital	82	3,100,000	28.7
capital-1-2	junior	capital	54	3,100,000	25.3
capital-2-3	junior	capital	78	3,100,000	23.3
yeongnam-2-3	junior	yeongnam	54	3,100,000	19.4
capital-3-2	mid	capital	60	4,800,000	18.3
chungho-1-3	mid	chungho	46	4,800,000	15.9
yeongnam-1-2	junior	yeongnam	54	3,100,000	15.3
capital-1-3	senior	capital	73	6,200,000	12.6
capital-3-1	lead	capital	70	7,600,000	10.6
yeongnam-1-1	lead	yeongnam	57	7,600,000	8.5
capital-2-1	lead	capital	51	7,600,000	7.8
capital-1-1	lead	capital	60	7,600,000	7.3
chungho-1-2	senior	chungho	58	6,200,000	6.9
yeongnam-2-2	senior	yeongnam	49	6,200,000	6.6
yeongnam-2-1	lead	yeongnam	45	7,600,000	5.3
gangje-1-3	mid	gangje	10	4,800,000	4.3
gangje-1-2	mid	gangje	12	4,800,000	2.2
chungho-1-1	lead	chungho	29	7,600,000	1.7
gangje-1-1	lead	gangje	10	7,600,000	0.7

The roster and its geography are real. The contracts and the revenue are not. · 36,040 · 217/245 · 202309–202608