Most pricing decisions are made by picking one price and defending it. A better approach is to pick three prices and compare them. A single price, examined alone, always looks reasonable — there is nothing to contradict it. Three prices, laid out side by side with their profit per unit, break-even units, and break-even ROAS, reveal trade-offs that a single price hides: how much volume each price demands, how much advertising each price can afford, and where a small price rise buys a large amount of safety.

The Pricing and Break-Even Simulator is designed for this comparison: it shows every formula, includes fees, shipping, advertising, and discounts, and lets scenarios sit next to each other. This post runs one fictional product at three prices, and shows how to read the comparison like a decision rather than a calculation.

What to compare, and why each figure matters

Three figures carry the comparison. Profit per unit is the money kept from each sale after all per-sale costs. It answers: "Is this price worth selling at, one order at a time?" Break-even units is how many units must sell to cover fixed monthly costs (rent, tools, subscriptions, a stall fee). It answers: "How much volume does this price demand of me?" Break-even ROAS is the advertising return at which ad spending exactly pays for itself. It answers: "Can my advertising actually afford this price?"

A price can look good on one figure and poor on another. A low price may need heroic volume to break even. A high price may break even on few sales but demand an advertising return the seller has never achieved. The comparison works because it forces all three questions at once, for every candidate price, instead of letting the most flattering figure decide alone.

Worked example: a fictional soap at £12, £16, and £20

Take a fictional seller, Example Botanics, selling a handmade soap bar. The fictional per-sale assumptions are held constant across all three prices so the comparison is fair: product cost £4, shipping and packaging £2.50, advertising cost £1.50 per sale, platform fee 10%, payment fee 3%, and no discount in this first comparison. Fixed monthly costs are £400.

At £12: fees are 13% of £12 = £1.56. Profit per unit = £12 − £1.56 − £2.50 − £1.50 − £4 = £2.44. Break-even units = £400 ÷ £2.44 ≈ 164 bars a month. Break-even ROAS: the simulator also shows the advertising return needed for ads to pay for themselves. At £12 that hurdle is high relative to the thin profit, while at £20 the same £1.50 of ads sits against a much larger profit cushion.

At £16: fees are 13% of £16 = £2.08. Profit per unit = £16 − £2.08 − £2.50 − £1.50 − £4 = £5.92. Break-even units = £400 ÷ £5.92 ≈ 68 bars a month. The same £400 of fixed costs now needs less than half the volume.

At £20: fees are 13% of £20 = £2.60. Profit per unit = £20 − £2.60 − £2.50 − £1.50 − £4 = £9.40. Break-even units = £400 ÷ £9.40 ≈ 43 bars a month.

The pattern is the point: each £4 rise in price more than doubles profit per unit at first, because the fixed per-sale costs (shipping, advertising, product) do not grow with price, while only the percentage fees do. The volume demanded collapses accordingly — from 164 bars to 68 to 43. A seller who can realistically sell 70 bars a month breaks even at £16 but not at £12, whatever the £12 price's appeal. Conversely, a seller who can sell 200 bars a month might still prefer £16 over £20 if the higher price is expected to cut volume sharply — a judgement the numbers inform but cannot make, because the simulator does not know how customers will react to each price.

Add the discount test to the winning price

Before committing, test the leading price with a discount applied, because discounts are where good prices quietly fail. Re-run the £16 price with a 15% discount: the effective price becomes £13.60, fees become 13% of £13.60 = £1.77, and profit per unit becomes £13.60 − £1.77 − £2.50 − £1.50 − £4 = £3.83. Break-even units rise from 68 to about 105. The price still works, but the safety margin has narrowed considerably — useful knowledge before a sale event, not after it.

If the discounted price had fallen to break-even volumes the seller could not reach, the answer would not necessarily be to abandon discounts, but to limit them: a smaller discount, a minimum order for the discount, or a discount on a higher-priced bundle rather than on the single bar. The comparison makes those choices visible; a single-price calculation keeps them hidden.

Reading the comparison as a decision

Choose the lowest price whose break-even volume you can realistically reach, whose break-even ROAS your past advertising has actually beaten, and whose discounted version still leaves a profit you can live with. That rule of thumb balances three risks at once: pricing so low that volume cannot save you, pricing so high that customers disappear, and discounting so deeply that the sale loses money. If no candidate price satisfies all three, the product's cost structure — not its price — is the problem, and the honest response is to reduce a cost or reconsider the product, rather than to keep searching for a price that cannot exist.

Honest limitations

All figures here are estimates from fictional inputs, not financial advice and not a profit promise. Real fees, shipping rates, and advertising costs change, and the comparison assumes the same sales volume logic at every price, when in reality a higher price usually reduces volume — by an amount no simulator can predict for a specific product. Customer reaction, competitor prices, and seasonality all sit outside the calculation. Use the comparison to rule out prices that cannot work and to choose among prices that can, then re-run it when real sales data replaces the assumptions.

For charting the three scenarios visually, Chart Builder can turn a small table of prices and profits into a chart, and CSV Cleaning Studio can tidy a sales export before that step. The background guide is profit, margin, and break-even explained.

FAQs

Why compare three prices instead of picking one?

Because a single price examined alone always looks reasonable. Side-by-side comparison reveals what each price demands in volume and advertising return, and which price leaves room for a discount.

What is break-even units?

It is how many units must sell to cover fixed monthly costs (such as rent, tools, or subscriptions) at a given profit per unit. Divide fixed costs by profit per unit. A higher profit per unit means fewer units needed.

What is break-even ROAS?

It is the advertising return at which ad spending exactly pays for itself for a product at a given price and cost structure. If your past campaigns beat that return, advertising at that price can pay; if they fall short, the price or ad costs need attention.

Should I test my price with a discount applied?

Yes. Discounts shrink the price that fees are calculated from and can turn a profitable price into a losing one on discounted orders. Test the discounted version before running a sale, not after.

human review pending client designation