Which contract types drive the most revenue, which deliver the best margins, and where your effective hourly rate tells a different story than the sticker price. Generated by AI via Proxuma Power BI MCP server.
Which contract types drive the most revenue, which deliver the best margins, and where your effective hourly rate tells a different story than the sticker price. 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: MSP operations teams and service delivery managers
How often: As needed for specific analysis or reporting requirements
Which contract types drive the most revenue, which deliver the best margins, and where your effective hourly rate tells a different story than the sticker price. Generated by AI via Proxuma Power BI MCP server.
EVALUATE
ADDCOLUMNS(
SUMMARIZE(
'BI_Autotask_Contracts',
'BI_Autotask_Contracts'[contract_type_name],
'BI_Autotask_Contracts'[contract_status_name]
),
"Count", CALCULATE(COUNTROWS('BI_Autotask_Contracts'))
)
ORDER BY [Count] DESCHow your 1,858 contracts break down by pricing model, and what share of each model is still active.
Recurring Service contracts dominate the portfolio. With 1,203 contracts (65% of total), this model is the backbone of revenue. Time & Materials accounts for 25%, Block Hours covers 10%, and Fixed Price has effectively been retired with zero active contracts.
| Model | Count | % |
|---|---|---|
| Recurring | 1,207 | 63.9% |
| T&M | 504 | 26.7% |
| Block Hours | 173 | 9.2% |
The retention gap between models is significant. Block Hours has a 91.6% active rate, the highest of any contract type. Recurring Service follows at 77.4%. Time & Materials sits at just 53.9%, meaning nearly half of all T&M contracts have gone inactive. This suggests T&M clients either convert to recurring agreements or churn entirely.
EVALUATE SUMMARIZECOLUMNS('BI_Autotask_Contracts'[contract_type_name], "Count", COUNTROWS('BI_Autotask_Contracts'))Revenue, cost, worked hours, and the effective hourly rate each client actually generates. Sorted by total revenue.
| Client | Revenue | Cost | Hours | Eff. Rate | Margin | Health |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patterson Hood Perez | $2,324,617 | $1,013,970 | 3,575 | $650 | 56.4% | Healthy |
| Martin Group | $2,212,915 | $894,222 | 1,206 | $1,835 | 59.6% | Healthy |
| Foster Inc | $1,431,177 | $603,420 | 3,050 | $469 | 57.8% | Healthy |
| Hernandez Ltd | $637,092 | $248,212 | 2,046 | $311 | 61.0% | Healthy |
| Unprofitable Client | $589,694 | $645,574 | 670 | $880 | -9.5% | Loss |
| Wall PLC | $476,622 | $214,395 | 1,479 | $322 | 55.0% | Healthy |
| Edwards Hall Hernandez | $469,660 | $224,394 | 943 | $498 | 52.2% | Healthy |
| Nelson Taylor Hicks | $416,450 | $206,868 | 36 | $11,451 | 50.3% | Review |
| Richards Burke Fowler | $328,165 | $107,091 | 660 | $498 | 67.4% | Healthy |
| Martinez Contreras Rios | $320,832 | $141,416 | 949 | $338 | 55.9% | Healthy |
| Price-Gomez | $286,926 | $120,188 | 823 | $348 | 58.1% | Healthy |
| Torres-Jones | $255,698 | $46,812 | 197 | $1,301 | 81.7% | Top Tier |
| Colon and Sons | $253,148 | $133,138 | 668 | $379 | 47.4% | Watch |
| Wilson Associates | $214,469 | $133,755 | 515 | $416 | 37.6% | Watch |
The spread between the best and worst effective rates is enormous. Torres-Jones generates $1,301 per worked hour at an 81.7% margin, making it the most efficient client relationship in the portfolio. On the other end, the Unprofitable Client costs $55,880 more than it brings in: a straight loss despite an $880 effective rate. The high rate just means billing items exist, but cost overruns eat everything.
Nelson Taylor Hicks is an outlier worth investigating. An $11,451 effective rate on just 36 hours suggests this client generates revenue almost entirely from product resale or recurring charges, not from labor. That is a very different business model than the labor-heavy clients like Patterson Hood Perez (3,575 hours) or Foster Inc (3,050 hours).
EVALUATE
ADDCOLUMNS(
TOPN(
15,
VALUES('BI_Autotask_Companies'[company_name]),
CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Billing_Items'[total_amount])),
DESC
),
"Revenue", CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Billing_Items'[total_amount])),
"Cost", CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Billing_Items'[our_cost])),
"WorkedHours", CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Tickets'[worked_hours])),
"BillableHours", CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Tickets'[billable_hours])),
"EffectiveRate", DIVIDE(
CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Billing_Items'[total_amount])),
CALCULATE(SUM('BI_Autotask_Tickets'[worked_hours])),
0
)
)
ORDER BY [Revenue] DESCThe Unprofitable Client has a -9.5% margin: $589,694 in revenue against $645,574 in cost. That is a $55,880 loss. Either the contract needs to be renegotiated, scope needs to be controlled, or the client needs to go.
Only 53.9% of T&M contracts are still active, compared to 77.4% for Recurring Service and 91.6% for Block Hours. Nearly half of all T&M relationships have ended. This model may work for project work, but it does not build long-term client stickiness.
Wilson Associates (37.6%) and Colon and Sons (47.4%) are underperforming the portfolio average of 52.1%. Wilson Associates in particular is trending toward unprofitable territory. A pricing review or scope reduction should be considered before they follow the same path as the loss-making client.
At 91.6% active rate, Block Hours keeps clients engaged longer than any other model. The prepaid commitment creates natural stickiness. With only 15 inactive contracts out of 179 total, churn is minimal.
Richards Burke Fowler (67.4%), Hernandez Ltd (61.0%), and Martin Group (59.6%) all sit well above the 50% margin line. Torres-Jones at 81.7% is exceptional. These clients validate that the current pricing works when scoping and delivery stay controlled.
1. Audit the Unprofitable Client immediately. A -9.5% margin on $589K revenue means the service team is spending more to deliver than the contract brings in. Pull the ticket history, identify the cost drivers, and decide whether to renegotiate or exit.
2. Convert high-value T&M clients to recurring agreements. The 53.9% active rate on T&M tells you that project-based relationships end. Identify T&M clients with consistent monthly hours and propose a Recurring Service contract. The data shows recurring clients stick around 23 percentage points longer.
3. Expand the Block Hours model. With 91.6% retention and only 179 contracts, Block Hours is underused. It works because prepaid hours create commitment on both sides. Offer Block Hours packages to clients who currently buy ad-hoc T&M work.
4. Set margin floor alerts at 45%. Wilson Associates (37.6%) and Colon and Sons (47.4%) need attention before they turn negative. Build a Power BI alert that flags any client dropping below 45% margin so the account team can act early.
5. Investigate high effective-rate outliers. Nelson Taylor Hicks ($11,451/hr) and Torres-Jones ($1,301/hr) generate revenue with almost no labor. Understanding their contract structure could reveal a template for other product-heavy or recurring-fee relationships.
The effective hourly rate divides total revenue by total worked hours for a client. It is not the contract rate or the billing rate. It is what the client actually pays per hour of your team's time, including recurring fees, product charges, and any other billing items. A client with a high effective rate and low hours usually generates most of its revenue from recurring or product charges rather than labor.
Block Hours contracts require clients to prepay for a bank of hours. This upfront commitment creates a psychological and financial incentive to keep using the service. Clients who have already paid for hours are far less likely to churn mid-contract. The 91.6% active rate reflects this built-in stickiness.
A negative margin means the cost of delivering service to that client exceeds what they pay. The -9.5% margin in this dataset means for every $1 billed, $1.095 was spent on delivery. Common causes include: scope creep on fixed-fee work, escalations that consume senior engineer time, or contracts priced below cost due to competitive pressure during the sales cycle.
Yes. Every DAX query in this report was written for the Proxuma Power BI data model. If you use Proxuma Power BI with Autotask, these queries will work on your dataset in Power BI Desktop. Open DAX Studio or the Performance Analyzer, paste the query, and run it. Your numbers will reflect your actual clients and contracts.
All 5 Fixed Price contracts are inactive. This pricing model has been effectively retired. Fixed Price carries the most risk for the MSP because any scope creep or underestimation comes directly out of margin. Most MSPs have moved away from it in favor of Recurring Service or Block Hours, both of which offer more predictable economics.
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