Skip to content
Centriu
Centriu Dash

Funnel Conversion-Rate Integrity Automation: When 40 Beats 9, the Ratio Is Not a Rate

A live sales-funnel report in Centriu Dash was found, in the browser, showing stage-to-stage conversion rates of 444.44%, 162.55%, and 107.69% — numbers that cannot exist in any real funnel, since a conversion rate is a fraction of a starting group and can never exceed 100%. It was not a math error: the underlying CRM, Centriu Orbit, allows a deal to be created directly at an advanced pipeline stage without ever passing through the earlier ones, so a later stage can genuinely be reached by more deals than an earlier stage was — nine deals reached one stage, forty reached the next, and dividing the two produced the impossible number. The fix does not touch the counts themselves, which stay fully visible on screen; it detects specifically the case where the next stage's count exceeds the current stage's count, and reports the conversion ratio as unavailable, with a plain-language reason naming both counts and the cause, instead of publishing a number that misrepresents what happened.
Impossible ratio, named not hidden
Raw counts stay fully visible
Command center screen with real metrics
When 40 beats 9, the ratio is not a rate.

A denominator that assumes something the data does not guarantee

A stage-to-stage conversion rate is a simple calculation — the count reaching the next stage, divided by the count that reached this one — and that simplicity is exactly what makes it easy to trust without checking a quiet assumption underneath it: that every deal in the next stage necessarily passed through this one first. When a CRM allows a deal to be registered directly at a later stage — a real, sometimes correct behavior for the sales process — that assumption breaks, and a formula that was never wrong on paper starts publishing numbers that cannot exist in reality.

How the underlying problem shows up before you fix it

A funnel report computes a stage-to-stage conversion rate as a straightforward division, with no check for the count in the numerator ever legitimately exceeding the count in the denominator.

A CRM permits a record to be created directly at an advanced stage of a pipeline, which is a real and sometimes intentional workflow, but silently invalidates any report downstream that assumes strict, sequential progression through every stage.

A dashboard displays a percentage above 100% and a person reading it either distrusts the entire report or, worse, repeats the number in a real business decision without realizing it is not a rate at all.

A full test suite — unit tests, typecheck, lint — passes cleanly because none of the existing test cases happen to construct the specific data shape (a later stage reached by more records than an earlier one) that triggers the defect.

The fix for a broken formula is applied to the display layer (hiding or rounding an odd-looking number) instead of the calculation layer, so the same invalid ratio keeps computing underneath, ready to resurface anywhere else the same numbers are read.

How a real report surfaced the gap, and how the fix names it instead of hiding it

The defect was found the way many of the most damaging reporting bugs are found: not by a failing test, but by a person looking at a live screen with real production data and noticing three numbers that were structurally impossible — 444.44%, 162.55%, and 107.69% conversion between adjacent funnel stages. This happened AFTER the underlying code had already passed a full build, a typecheck, a lint pass, and 147 existing automated tests — none of which constructed a dataset where a later stage held more records than the stage before it, because until this finding, nobody had confirmed that scenario was a real, live possibility rather than a theoretical one.

Investigating the actual numbers behind the three impossible percentages confirmed the mechanism directly: a genuine set of deals had reached an early pipeline stage, and a larger genuine set of deals had reached the very next stage — not because deals moved backward, but because Centriu Orbit's own deal-creation flow allows a new deal to be registered directly at any stage of the pipeline, skipping earlier ones entirely when the sales process calls for it. Both counts were completely real and independently correct; dividing one by the other to produce a "conversion rate" was the part that stopped being valid, because the formula's implicit premise — that the next-stage group is always a subset of the current-stage group — was no longer true.

The fix adds exactly one check to the stage-breakdown calculation: before dividing, it compares the next stage's reached-count to the current stage's reached-count. When the next stage's count is the larger of the two, the function stops treating the pair as a valid conversion measurement and instead returns an explicit "unavailable" result, carrying a plain-language reason that names both raw counts and states directly that some deals were created straight into the later stage without passing through the earlier one. When the next stage's count is smaller or equal — the ordinary, expected case — the original conversion-rate calculation runs exactly as before, unchanged. In both cases, the two raw counts themselves remain fully visible on the report; what disappears is only the invalid division, never the underlying data.

What is actually built today

Centriu Dash's stage-breakdown calculation compares each pair of adjacent funnel stages before computing a conversion rate between them.

When a later stage has been reached by MORE records than the stage before it — a real, valid state when a CRM allows direct entry at an advanced stage — the conversion ratio for that pair is marked unavailable rather than computed.

The unavailable result carries a specific, named reason: both raw counts, and a plain statement that some records were created directly at the later stage without passing through the earlier one.

The two raw stage counts remain fully visible on the report in every case — what the fix removes is only the invalid division, never the underlying numbers.

The ordinary case (a later stage reached by the same or fewer records than the stage before it) computes the conversion rate exactly as it always did, unchanged.

A dedicated automated test constructs the exact failure condition — more records created directly at a later stage than reached the stage before it — and asserts the ratio is marked unavailable with the correct reason and coverage counts, closing the specific gap that 147 prior tests had not covered.

Nine reached one stage, forty reached the next (illustrative framing of the actual measured finding)

A sales pipeline shows nine deals having reached an early stage and forty deals having reached the very next stage — not because thirty-one deals somehow moved backward through the funnel, but because many were registered directly at the later stage by a valid, separate part of the sales process. Dividing forty by nine produces a headline number well over 400%, a conversion rate that cannot exist in any real funnel. After the fix, that same pair of stages reports its conversion as unavailable, with a plain reason naming both the nine and the forty and explaining why they cannot be divided into a rate — while both raw counts stay exactly where they were on the screen.

What changes operationally

No funnel report in Centriu Dash can publish a stage-to-stage conversion rate above 100% again — the specific condition that produces an impossible ratio is now detected and named, with the underlying counts left fully visible, closing a gap that a full build, typecheck, lint pass, and 147 existing tests had not caught.

When this is not the right fit

This automation governs when a conversion ratio is mathematically valid to compute at all — it does not change how or where a CRM allows a deal to be created, and it does not retroactively flag or correct any conversion percentage displayed before this fix shipped.

Hiding an odd number vs. naming why it cannot exist

The easy version of this fix would round the number, cap it visually at 100%, or simply not display anything above that threshold — all of which make the screen look normal again without explaining what is actually happening underneath. Centriu's fix does the harder, more honest thing: it names the specific reason a ratio cannot be computed, in the same place a person would otherwise see a wrong number, so nobody has to wonder whether the dashboard is broken or whether the sales process genuinely allowed deals to skip stages.

Related systems

Main system: Centriu Dash. Complementary when relevant: Centriu Orbit.

What it does NOT do

  • Does not change how or when Centriu Orbit allows a deal to be created directly at an advanced pipeline stage — that remains a normal, valid part of the sales workflow.
  • Does not retroactively correct or flag any conversion percentage shown on a report before this fix shipped.
  • Does not hide or remove the raw stage counts — both numbers stay fully visible in every case, including when the ratio between them is marked unavailable.
  • Does not attempt to estimate or approximate a conversion rate when the strict-progression assumption is broken — an invalid ratio is reported as unavailable, never as a best guess.
  • Does not apply to every possible funnel-reporting defect — this fix closes the specific, measured impossible-ratio condition found in this audit.
  • Does not replace a person's own read of the raw counts when deciding whether a given pipeline stage needs attention.

Security and governance

The funnel calculation reads deal and stage data already scoped to the requesting organization through Centriu Orbit's own access controls; this fix changes only how a ratio is computed and reported, not what data is read. Any business data referenced remains subject to Brazil's LGPD (Law No. 13,709/2018). Full detail on access control lives at /governanca and /iso.

Pricing and contracting

Available by monthly subscription, with tiered plans. Values and terms come from the official pricing table at /precos (Centriu's central source — never restated here).

Frequently asked questions

Why did the funnel report show a conversion rate above 100%?

Because a later pipeline stage had genuinely been reached by more deals than the stage before it — not a data error, but the real result of the CRM allowing deals to be created directly at an advanced stage, skipping earlier ones.

How was this found if 147 tests were already passing?

None of the existing tests constructed a dataset where a later stage held more records than an earlier one — the defect was found by a person reading a live report against real production data, not by an automated test.

What does the report show now instead of the impossible percentage?

An explicit "unavailable" result with a plain-language reason naming both raw stage counts and explaining that some deals were created directly at the later stage.

Are the raw stage counts still visible?

Yes — in every case, the raw number of deals that reached each stage remains fully visible on the report; only the invalid division between an affected pair of stages is withheld.

Does this stop deals from being created directly at an advanced stage?

No — that remains a normal, valid CRM behavior. The fix only changes how the funnel report reacts when that happens, so it never publishes a rate that cannot exist.

What does Centriu Dash cost?

It is sold by subscription with a published starting price — exact current values are on the central pricing page.

See how Centriu Dash keeps every funnel percentage mathematically real

Reach our commercial team directly, or leave your details below — we'll follow up with guidance for your case.

Sources

  1. Centriu Dash — public product page — Centriu, 2026-07-20 · link(primária)
  2. Centriu Dash — public factsheet (API, JSON) — Centriu, 2026-07-21 · link
  3. Centriu Orbit — public product page — Centriu, 2026-07-20 · link(primária)
  4. Centriu Orbit — public factsheet (API, JSON) — Centriu, 2026-07-21 · link

Last material update on .

By · AI-assisted production, with human review