Asana is the tool we all know even if we don't use it ourselves. With that famous B2C CEO that decided to do SaaS next.

It's crossed $250,000,000 in ARR and is starting to march upmarket

Here are 5 Interesting Learnings from Asana at $250M ARR:

#1. Asana, like Slack, has self-service roots. But now, 40% of its customers are closed by the sales team, trending to 50%.

Asana is now planning to double the size of its sales team in 2020
#2. Asana has 115% NRR overall, but it's the segmentation that's interesting.

140% NRR for $50k+ customers
125% NRR for $5k-$50k customers
100% or so NRR for < $5k customers

Given it still skews 60% SMB, this is consistent with other market leaders like Zendesk, etc
#3. Asana is growing 55% at $250M+ in ARR, which is very impressive and top-tier. But its $50k+ accounts are growing >>100%+<<

We saw with Zendesk and Shopify the SMB growth keep pace with enterprise, and we saw with Slack enterprise be the engine of growth

Asana is in middle
#4. Its crossed 89,000 customers, so the average customer pays ~$2,800 a year. So the average ticket is still quite small.

Asana has the challenge many of you do. The Big Customers are growing fastest (100% YoY), but 40% of its revenue is still from accounts < $5k ACV.
#5. Revenue growth is >far< outpacing new customer growth. This is an important theme for almost all SaaS leaders except Slack.

Asana is growing 55% at $250m+ in ARR!! But new customer growth was ~10% YoY.

So again, lean way, way into your existing customers.
Some bonus learnings:

#6. Churn has returned to pre-Covid levels. So no more blaming Covid here.

#7. Asana added 130+ new features in 2020. How about you? Agile wins in very competitive spaces. Asana is in a very competitive space.
#8. It's late, but as Asana leans into $50k+ deals, it's adding more classic -- and necessary -- enterprise features. Enhanced admin controls & enterprise-wide security especially.

You just have to add admin-level controls if you want to go enterprise. So do it early.
A deeper dive here:

https://t.co/gN4YSINoX6

More from Trading

You May Also Like

This is a pretty valiant attempt to defend the "Feminist Glaciology" article, which says conventional wisdom is wrong, and this is a solid piece of scholarship. I'll beg to differ, because I think Jeffery, here, is confusing scholarship with "saying things that seem right".


The article is, at heart, deeply weird, even essentialist. Here, for example, is the claim that proposing climate engineering is a "man" thing. Also a "man" thing: attempting to get distance from a topic, approaching it in a disinterested fashion.


Also a "man" thing—physical courage. (I guess, not quite: physical courage "co-constitutes" masculinist glaciology along with nationalism and colonialism.)


There's criticism of a New York Times article that talks about glaciology adventures, which makes a similar point.


At the heart of this chunk is the claim that glaciology excludes women because of a narrative of scientific objectivity and physical adventure. This is a strong claim! It's not enough to say, hey, sure, sounds good. Is it true?