Percent of Raise vs. Percent of ARR: Which Should Set Your Marketing Budget?

The percent of raise vs percent of ARR marketing budget question is one of the first decisions a funded founder faces after closing a round. Both are legitimate methods. Both are commonly used. And for most early-stage companies, they produce numbers so different from each other that using the wrong one at the wrong time can leave you either underinvesting in a critical growth window or spending ahead of what your business can sustain.

Here is how each method works, when each one applies, and how to know when to switch from one to the other.

What does percent of raise mean for marketing budgeting?

Percent of raise means you are calculating your marketing budget as a portion of the capital you just closed. If you raised $10 million at Series A and allocate 25 percent to marketing, your marketing budget is $2.5 million for the year.

This approach makes sense before your acquisition channels are proven. When you are still testing which channels produce customers at a cost you can sustain, you need a budget that funds experimentation, not one constrained by early-stage ARR that may not yet reflect your actual market potential.

Research compiled by GTM8020 across 38 data sets shows that Series A companies typically allocate 25 to 40 percent of funding to marketing, and those allocating 30 percent or more achieve 40 percent faster revenue growth than conservative counterparts. Carta’s Q1 2025 data puts the median Series A round at $7.9 million, meaning a 25 to 30 percent allocation produces a first-year marketing budget of roughly $2 to $2.4 million.

What does percent of ARR mean for marketing budgeting?

Percent of ARR means you are setting your marketing spend relative to your annual recurring revenue. The B2B SaaS benchmark that has held up across the industry is 8 to 10 percent of ARR for companies with established acquisition channels, per GTM8020’s analysis.

This method works well once you have validated your channels and have two or three quarters of real CAC data. At that point, you know roughly what it costs to acquire a customer in each channel, and your ARR reflects real traction. The ARR-based number keeps spend proportional to revenue, which your board and investors can evaluate against standard industry benchmarks.

How do percent of raise vs percent of ARR produce such different results?

Consider a company that has just raised $8 million at Series A and is sitting at $1.5 million in ARR. Percent of raise at 25 percent produces a $2 million marketing budget. Percent of ARR at 8 percent produces $120,000. Same company. Two numbers that are $1.88 million apart.

In the first year post-raise, the percent-of-ARR number is almost always too small. It reflects where you have been, not what you need to build. The percent-of-raise number reflects the growth ambition your investors funded. This is the core reason the percent of raise vs percent of ARR marketing budget decision matters so much in year one: choosing the wrong frame can dramatically limit what you are able to test.

When should you switch from raise-based to ARR-based budgeting?

For most Series A companies, the right time to transition is between months six and nine post-close. By that point you should have enough channel data to know what works, a CAC figure you trust, and an ARR run rate that gives the ARR-based calculation real meaning.

The signal that you are ready to switch is not the calendar. It is whether you can answer these questions with actual data: What does it cost to acquire a customer from each channel? Which channels are producing customers who stay? Is your ARR growing in a way that a percentage of it would fund the marketing motion you need?

If you cannot answer those questions yet, stay with raise-based budgeting and keep your spend in experiments rather than channel commitments.

What does this mean for hiring marketing leadership?

The raise-based budgeting period is also the period when most founders are running marketing without a CMO. Deploying a significant marketing budget without senior leadership in place raises the risk of misallocation on channels or commitments that are difficult to evaluate or unwind.

If you are in this position, a fractional CMO can own the budget, make the channel decisions, and build the measurement infrastructure you will need to transition to ARR-based budgeting with confidence. You can read more about that on our fractional CMO page.

For a broader look at marketing allocation decisions after a raise, see the full guide: How Much of Your Raise Should Go to Marketing.


Related reading:

Frequently Asked Questions

Which method do investors prefer to see?

Investors tend to evaluate marketing spend in context rather than preferring one method. Early-stage investors generally want to see that spend is tied to validating the go-to-market model. Later-stage investors and board members are more likely to benchmark against ARR percentages because that is the standard their portfolio companies report against. Having both numbers and being able to explain them is more useful than committing rigidly to one frame.

What if my raise-based budget and my ARR-based budget are far apart?

That gap is normal and expected early in a raise cycle. It does not mean one is wrong. It means you are in the raise-based period and your ARR has not yet caught up to the growth your investors funded. The gap should narrow as your ARR grows. If it is not narrowing, that is worth examining — but the gap itself is not a problem.

Can I use both methods at the same time?

Yes, and many founders do. Using raise-based allocation to set the overall budget and ARR percentage as a sanity check against industry benchmarks is a reasonable approach. If your raise-based budget is significantly above the ARR benchmark, be prepared to explain why to your board — and have a specific hypothesis for what that incremental spend will prove.


Leave a Reply