Unit A and Unit B start with two contrasting property types, so you can see a real margin gap immediately. Change either to load different example figures, or edit any field directly with your own numbers.
- Enter values above to see what comparing two unit types reveals.
Same revenue, different cost layers: this is what portfolio averages flatten out.
The exact figures behind the chart and the summary above, line by line, in real currency.
| Line item | Unit A | Unit B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Annual revenue | € — | € — | — |
| OTA commission | € — | € — | — |
| Direct channel cost | € — | € — | — |
| Owner payout / rent | € — | € — | — |
| Cleaning | € — | € — | — |
| Local taxes | € — | € — | — |
| Hidden costs (total) | |||
| Contribution Margin | € — | € — | — |
Your tech stack should reveal this automatically.
Running this analysis manually for one unit is useful. Running it for every unit in your portfolio, every month, is where the real commercial advantage lives. Most operators do not have this visibility because their systems were not designed to surface it. That is the gap between an operation that knows its numbers and one that hopes for the best.
The operators who build cost transparency into their tech stack make better decisions: which units to keep, which agreements to renegotiate, which channels to invest in, which costs to challenge. The ones who do not, find out too late.
Building that cost transparency into how you decide is the work I do with operators. If you want to talk it through: rbisschoff@gmail.com
