What range can a lost profits opinion actually support?
An opinion built on one growth rate and one margin falls apart the moment the other side changes an assumption. This template moves the but-for growth, the contribution margin and the share of the shortfall the market caused all at once, so the output is a damages range with the odds behind every figure in it.
Legal Advanced Monte Carlo Pro engine
After you install, this is the model to open.
How Much Are the Lost Profits Worth?
- In your spreadsheet, click the Sortia icon in the strip of icons down the right-hand edge. No strip? Click the arrow at the bottom-right to open it. You can also use Extensions, then Sortia, then Open Sortia.
- Click Start from a template and put that name in the search box.
- Pick the card with that name and click Load this template. It arrives on a new tab with real numbers already in it.
This one runs on a Pro engine, and every free install includes five full-quality runs on your own numbers, shared across all five Pro engines rather than five for each. After that, Pro is $199/year.
The answer
The percentile ladder is the opinion range and the mean is the point estimate. The tornado tells you which assumption the number really turns on.
- Mean damages
- $1.51M brought to the trial date
- Defensible range
- $1.16M - $1.91M P5 to P95
- Chance of topping the claim
- 11% the pleaded $1.8M
- Top driver
- Apportionment ahead of margin and growth
Damages land at a mean of $1.51M with a supportable range of $1.16M to $1.91M. The pleaded $1.8M sits near the P90, so only about 11% of scenarios reach it, which is the honest answer to whether the complaint number is a point estimate or a best case. The tornado settles the cross-examination question too: the market share of the shortfall drives the answer harder than margin does, so that is the assumption to document first.
The model
A three-year damages grid plus an assumption block. But-for revenue grows off the year before the breach, actual revenue is what the business really booked, and the gap becomes lost profit after margin and apportionment. Because the losses are in the past, each year is brought forward to the trial date at simple prejudgment interest rather than discounted back.
| Base year revenue before the breach | $5,200,000 |
| But-for growth rate | 2% - 5% - 9% (uncertain) |
| Contribution margin | 34% - 40% - 46% (uncertain) |
| Share of shortfall caused by the market | 10% - 25% - 45% (uncertain) |
| Prejudgment interest rate | 6% simple per year |
| Damages claimed in the complaint | $1,800,000 |
| Total lost profits at the trial date | simulated |
Once it is in your sheet
- The model arrives with real numbers in it and runs as it stands, so you can press the button first and understand it second.
- Change the numbers to yours. The sheet marks which cells are inputs and which hold formulas, and most labels carry a note explaining the row.
- Press the run button at the bottom of the panel. It is labeled for the tool you are in, and the result lands on its own tab, with a written reading of it beside the figures.
Never used Google Sheets? Start here goes the whole way, in seven steps, and assumes nothing.
Next question
- Whose cost to complete should you believe?Is the Cost to Complete Claim Credible?
- Did that delay actually push the finish date?
- Will your reserve cover a bad claims year?How Big Could the Claims Year Be?
- Who is actually carrying the month?Which Lawyer Takes Which Matter?
- Why is your average claim the wrong number?What Do Claims Actually Cost?
- Is intake growing, or does it just feel busy?How Many Matters Are Coming?
Every model like this one, and the method behind them: Monte Carlo simulation.