“CSAT Year-over-Year Comparison: Satisfaction Trend Analysis”
Autotask PSA Datto RMM Datto Backup Microsoft 365 SmileBack HubSpot IT Glue All reports
AI-GENERATED REPORT
You searched for:

CSAT Year-over-Year Comparison: Satisfaction Trend Analysis

Are your clients more satisfied this year than last year? Where did satisfaction improve, where did it drop, and what drove the change? Generated by AI via Proxuma Power BI MCP server.

Built from: SmileBack CSAT
How this report was made
1
Autotask PSA
Multiple data sources combined
2
Proxuma Power BI
Pre-built MSP semantic model, 50+ measures
3
AI via MCP
Claude or ChatGPT writes DAX queries, executes them, formats output
4
This Report
KPIs, breakdowns, trends, recommendations
Ready in < 15 min

CSAT Year-over-Year Comparison: Satisfaction Trend Analysis

Are your clients more satisfied this year than last year? Where did satisfaction improve, where did it drop, and what drove the change? Generated by AI via Proxuma Power BI MCP server.

The data covers the full scope of Autotask PSA records relevant to this analysis, broken down by the key dimensions your team needs for day-to-day decisions and client reporting.

Who should use this: Service managers, account managers, and MSP leadership tracking customer experience

How often: Weekly for trend monitoring, monthly for team reviews, quarterly for QBRs

Time saved
Aggregating satisfaction data from survey tools and mapping it to clients takes hours. This report automates it.
Early warning
Declining satisfaction scores predict churn. Catching the trend early gives you time to act.
QBR material
Client-ready satisfaction data with trends and benchmarks for quarterly reviews.
Report categoryCSAT & Customer Satisfaction
Data sourceAutotask PSA · Datto RMM · Datto Backup · Microsoft 365 · SmileBack · HubSpot · IT Glue
RefreshReal-time via Power BI
Generation timeUnder 15 minutes
AI requiredClaude, ChatGPT or Copilot
AudienceService managers, account managers
Where to find this in Proxuma
Power BI › CSAT › CSAT Year-over-Year Comparison: Satis...
What you can measure in this report
Summary Metrics
Breakdown by Client
Trend Analysis (3 Quarters)
Satisfaction Risk Matrix
Satisfaction Detail by Category
Customer Satisfaction Health
Key Findings
Strategic Recommendations
Frequently Asked Questions
Primary Metric
Secondary Metric
Coverage Rate
AI-Generated Power BI Report
CSAT Year-over-Year Comparison:
Satisfaction Trend Analysis

Are your clients more satisfied this year than last year? Where did satisfaction improve, where did it drop, and what drove the change? Generated by AI via Proxuma Power BI MCP server.

Demo Report: This report uses synthetic data to demonstrate AI-generated insights from Proxuma Power BI. The structure, DAX queries, and analysis reflect real MSP data patterns.
1.0
Summary Metrics
Key indicators for CSAT Year-over-Year Comparison:Satisfaction Trend Analysis.
Primary Metric
94.2%
Above target
Secondary Metric
847
Current quarter
Coverage Rate
87.3%
12 gaps
Trend Direction
Improving
+3.2% QoQ
Data note: Calculated from the most recent complete dataset.
View DAX Query - CSAT Summary Metrics
EVALUATE ROW(
    "AvgCSAT", [SB - Average CSAT Score],
    "ResponseRate", [SB - Survey Response Rate %],
    "TotalResponses", COUNTROWS(BI_SmileBack_Surveys),
    "NegativeRate", [SB - Negative Response Rate %]
)
2.0
Breakdown by Client
YearReviewsPositiveNeutralNegativeCSAT %Negative %
20211,2351,093727088.5%5.7%
20222,4212,257838193.2%3.3%
20232,7392,601657395.0%2.7%
20241,9351,798578092.9%4.1%
20251,7301,5265614888.2%8.6%
20261181106293.2%1.7%

The gap between top and bottom performers requires attention.

View DAX Query - CSAT by Client
EVALUATE
GROUPBY(
  ADDCOLUMNS(
    FILTER('BI_SmileBack_Reviews', NOT(ISBLANK('BI_SmileBack_Reviews'[rated_on]))),
    "Yr", LEFT('BI_SmileBack_Reviews'[rated_on], 4)
  ),
  [Yr],
  "Reviews", COUNTX(CURRENTGROUP(), 'BI_SmileBack_Reviews'[proxuma_source_id]),
  "Positive", SUMX(CURRENTGROUP(), IF('BI_SmileBack_Reviews'[rating]=1, 1, 0)),
  "Neutral", SUMX(CURRENTGROUP(), IF('BI_SmileBack_Reviews'[rating]=0, 1, 0)),
  "Negative", SUMX(CURRENTGROUP(), IF('BI_SmileBack_Reviews'[rating]=-1, 1, 0))
)
ORDER BY [Yr]
3.0
Trend Analysis (3 Quarters)
Q1 2026
87.4%
Q4 2025
84.2%
Q3 2025
81.8%

Improvement from 81.8% to 87.4% over three quarters.

View DAX Query - Satisfaction Trend
EVALUATE
SUMMARIZECOLUMNS(
    BI_SmileBack_Surveys[survey_month],
    "AvgScore", [SB - Average CSAT Score],
    "ResponseCount", COUNTROWS(BI_SmileBack_Surveys),
    "ResponseRate", [SB - Survey Response Rate %]
)
ORDER BY BI_SmileBack_Surveys[survey_month] ASC
4.0
Satisfaction Risk Matrix
Identifying clients at risk based on CSAT scores and response rates.
HIGH RISK
4 entities
Performance significantly below portfolio average. Immediate action required.
MODERATE RISK
7 entities
Performance below target but stable. Review within 2 weeks.
LOW RISK
12 entities
Performance above target level. Standard monitoring sufficient.
NOT ASSESSED
3 entities
Insufficient data available for risk assessment.

The risk matrix shows that most entities fall in the low-risk category, but the high-risk group demands immediate attention. The moderate-risk group shows a declining trend that could escalate without intervention.

5.0
Satisfaction Detail by Category
Granular breakdown of CSAT scores.
CategoryItemsPrimarySecondaryStatus
Category A23494.2%14Healthy
Category B18789.3%20Review
Category C15691.7%13Healthy
Category D9886.7%13Review
Category E6782.1%12At Risk
Category F4595.6%2Healthy

The detailed breakdown shows clear performance differences. The bottom two categories require targeted action to improve overall portfolio health.

6.0
Customer Satisfaction Health
Portfolio-wide satisfaction indicators.
92.4% health score
Portfolio Health
87.3% of 100%
Coverage
23 action items
Open Items

Overall portfolio health is strong at 92.4%, but the 87.3% coverage rate suggests that roughly 1 in 8 entities is not fully monitored. The 23 open action items represent a manageable backlog if addressed within 2 weeks.

7.0
Key Findings
!

Performance Gap Requires Attention

The gap between top and bottom performers is wider than expected. The bottom 20% scores more than 25 percentage points below the portfolio average, indicating structural issues that require targeted intervention.

!

Declining Trend in Moderate Risk Group

Entities in the moderate risk category show a declining trend over the past quarter. Without intervention, 3-4 of these entities may shift to the high-risk category within 60 days.

Top Performers Remain Consistent

The top 30% of the portfolio maintains stable performance above target, indicating current best practices are effective and can serve as a model for the rest.

8.0
Strategic Recommendations

1. Conduct a targeted review of all high-risk entities within 2 weeks. Document the root cause for each entity and create a remediation plan with clear deadlines and accountable owners.

2. Implement automated monitoring for the moderate-risk group. Set thresholds that trigger an alert when performance drops 5 percentage points below target, enabling early intervention before entities slip into high risk.

3. Schedule this report monthly as part of the QBR process. Use the trend data to verify that improvement initiatives are delivering measurable results across multiple quarters.

9.0
Frequently Asked Questions
How often is this report updated?

Data syncs every 24 hours from the source systems. The report reflects the most recent complete dataset.

Can I use this report in QBR presentations?

Yes. This report is designed to be QBR-ready. Export the key metrics and trend data to include in your quarterly business review.

What should I do about high-risk entities?

Schedule a targeted review for each high-risk entity. Create an action plan with remediation steps and follow up within 2 weeks.

Generate this report from your own data

Connect Proxuma Power BI to your PSA, RMM, and M365 environment, use an MCP-compatible AI to ask questions, and generate custom reports - in minutes, not days.

See more reports Get started