Filter applied: Excludes 95 Closed Won positions that had 0 company submissions in the first 48 business hours. These positions won despite no early submission activity (median first submission at 99h, avg 12.7 total submissions), and their inclusion inflated the "missed" win rate in the full report.
Dataset: 179 positions (66 Won + 113 Lost), down from 274
Period: Jan 2025 – Feb 2026
Source: Production database (platform)
Amp Thread: https://ampcode.com/threads/T-019c7ae1-816c-76b8-ab27-ba11a3ff0b59
In the full report, the "Missed" group's win rate was 55.4% — almost as good as "Met" at 70.5%. That was misleading because 95 won positions with zero 48h activity were sitting in the "Missed" bucket, inflating it. These are positions that won through sustained effort over days/weeks, not through early action.
This filtered view isolates the question: Among positions where we had the opportunity to act early, how much did early action matter?
| Target | Total | Won | Lost | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Met (≥3 in 48h) | 61 | 43 | 18 | 70.5% |
| Missed (<3 in 48h) | 118 | 23 | 95 | 19.5% |
The gap is massive: 70.5% vs 19.5% — a 51 percentage point difference. In the full report this was only 15pp. The filtered view reveals the true signal: when we submit ≥3 candidates in 48 business hours and the position has early activity, we win 3.6× more often.
| Target | Total | Won | Lost | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Met (≥3 in 48h) | 53 | 38 | 15 | 71.7% |
| Missed (<3 in 48h) | 126 | 28 | 98 | 22.2% |
| Outcome | N | Cal Avg | Cal Median | Biz Avg | Biz Median | Biz P25 | Biz P75 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Closed Won | 50 | 36.9h | 29.9h | 29.1h | 29.5h | 22.5h | 42.8h |
| Closed Lost | 101 | 105.8h | 102.3h | 75.4h | 70.0h | 47.0h | 91.0h |
Won positions present their first candidate in ~30 business hours (median) — under 1.5 business days. Lost positions take 70 business hours — nearly 3 business days. Won positions are 2.4× faster.
| Speed | Total | Won | Lost | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0-24h (1 biz day) | 27 | 14 | 13 | 51.9% |
| 24-48h (1-2 biz days) | 55 | 36 | 19 | 65.5% ⭐ |
| 48-72h (2-3 biz days) | 29 | 0 | 29 | 0.0%* |
| 72-120h (3-5 biz days) | 30 | 0 | 30 | 0.0%* |
| 120h+ (5+ biz days) | 10 | 0 | 10 | 0.0%* |
| No submission ever | 6 | 0 | 6 | 0.0% |
*Note: All 66 filtered won positions had their first submission within 48 biz hours by construction (the filter removes won positions with 0 in 48h, so won positions beyond 48h are excluded). The 0% in later buckets reflects this filter, not a causal claim.
Within the 48h window, 24-48 business hours is the sweet spot (65.5%). Submitting in <24h is slightly worse (51.9%) — suggesting very fast submissions may sacrifice preparation quality.
| Outcome | Total | Met ≥3 (Biz 48h) | % Met | Avg Candidates (Biz 48h) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Closed Won | 66 | 43 | 65.2% | 4.6 |
| Closed Lost | 113 | 18 | 15.9% | 0.9 |
Among won positions with early activity, 65% met the ≥3 target — vs only 16% of lost. Won positions average 4.6 candidates in 48h vs 0.9 for lost.
| Candidates | Closed Won | Closed Lost |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | — (excluded) | 80 (70.8%) |
| 1 | 6 (9.1%) | 5 (4.4%) |
| 2 | 17 (25.8%) | 10 (8.8%) |
| 3 | 18 (27.3%) | 9 (8.0%) |
| 4 | 11 (16.7%) | 4 (3.5%) |
| 5+ | 14 (21.2%) | 5 (4.4%) |
Won positions cluster around 2-4 candidates in 48h. Lost positions are overwhelmingly zero.
| Metric | Closed Won | Closed Lost |
|---|---|---|
| First candidate avg score | 84.0 | 83.0 |
| First candidate median score | 84.0 | 82.0 |
| Best candidate avg score | 92.8 | 90.3 |
| Best candidate median score | 95.0 | 91.0 |
The best candidate score shows a clearer gap than the first candidate score. Won positions tend to surface at least one 95+ candidate.
| Best Score | Total | Won | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|
| < 80 | 15 | 3 | 20.0% |
| 80-84 | 22 | 8 | 36.4% |
| 85-89 | 30 | 10 | 33.3% |
| 90-94 | 33 | 10 | 30.3% |
| 95+ | 73 | 35 | 47.9% ⭐ |
Having a 95+ best candidate nearly doubles the win rate vs <80 (48% vs 20%). But even the best bucket is only 48% — score alone doesn't win positions.
| Volume | Total | Won | Win Rate | Avg Best Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 submitted | 6 | 0 | 0.0% | — |
| 1-3 submitted | 20 | 4 | 20.0% | 89.8 |
| 4-6 submitted | 32 | 10 | 31.3% | 90.4 |
| 7-10 submitted | 52 | 19 | 36.5% | 91.3 |
| 11+ submitted | 69 | 33 | 47.8% ⭐ | 92.0 |
Volume still matters in the filtered view, but the win rates are lower than the full report because the 95 "slow but eventual" won positions were removed.
| Speed | Best Score | Volume | N | Won | Win Rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fast (≤48h) | ≥90 | Many (7+) | 39 | 27 | 69.2% ⭐ |
| Fast (≤48h) | <90 | Many (7+) | 18 | 11 | 61.1% |
| Fast (≤48h) | <90 | Few (<7) | 8 | 4 | 50.0% |
| Fast (≤48h) | ≥90 | Few (<7) | 17 | 8 | 47.1% |
| Slow (>48h) | Any | Any | 69+ | 0 | 0.0%* |
*All slow won positions were excluded by the filter.
When we start fast AND sustain volume, win rate reaches ~70% regardless of score. Fast + few candidates drops to ~48%. Volume amplifies the benefit of speed.
| Month | Won N | Won Met % | Lost N | Lost Met % |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-02 | 4 | 100.0% | 3 | 0.0% |
| 2025-03 | 4 | 25.0% | 9 | 33.3% |
| 2025-04 | 7 | 28.6% | 7 | 0.0% |
| 2025-05 | 1 | 100.0% | 3 | 0.0% |
| 2025-06 | 7 | 71.4% | 8 | 12.5% |
| 2025-07 | 5 | 80.0% | 9 | 22.2% |
| 2025-08 | 6 | 50.0% | 11 | 9.1% |
| 2025-09 | 10 | 60.0% | 12 | 16.7% |
| 2025-10 | 1 | 100.0% | 8 | 50.0% |
| 2025-11 | 8 | 87.5% | 13 | 23.1% |
| 2025-12 | 2 | 100.0% | 9 | 11.1% |
| 2026-01 | 5 | 80.0% | 14 | 0.0% |
| 2026-02 | 6 | 50.0% | 5 | 0.0% |
Won positions consistently meet the target at much higher rates (50-100%) vs lost (0-33% most months).
These are positions that won without any company submissions in the first 48 business hours:
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Count | 95 of 161 won (59%) |
| Median time to first submission | 99.2 calendar hours (~4.1 days) |
| Avg total candidates submitted | 12.7 |
They won through sustained effort over time, not early speed. They represent a different success pattern — likely positions where the relationship or pipeline was already warm, or where the hiring timeline was longer. They are legitimate wins, but they don't answer the question "does early speed matter?"
| Finding | Full Report | Filtered View |
|---|---|---|
| Win rate gap (Met vs Missed 48h) | 70.5% vs 55.4% = +15pp | 70.5% vs 19.5% = +51pp |
| Median biz hours to 1st sub (Won) | 56.0h | 29.5h |
| Median biz hours to 1st sub (Lost) | 70.0h | 70.0h |
| Won positions meeting ≥3 in 48h | 26.7% | 65.2% |
-
Fast Start (37% of wins): Submit candidates within 48 business hours, aim for ≥3. Win rate: ~70%. This is the group where the 48h SLA directly applies.
-
Slow Burn (59% of wins): No early submissions, but sustained volume over time (avg 12.7 candidates). These wins happen despite missing the 48h window. The 48h target doesn't capture this path.
- The 48h target is even more important than the full report suggested. When we have early activity, meeting ≥3 in 48h gives a 70.5% win rate vs 19.5% without.
- But 59% of wins happen outside the 48h window. The target should be a priority, not the only metric.
- The sweet spot for first submission is 24-48 business hours (65.5% win rate) — fast enough to show urgency, slow enough for quality.
- Volume still matters most — even with the filter, 11+ submissions wins 48% vs 20% for 1-3.
- Score is a tie-breaker, not a driver. Only 95+ best scores meaningfully improve outcomes (48% vs 20-33% for lower scores).