How many salespeople do you need? This question is on the mind of many sales leaders, especially with the increasing presence of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The short answer is that depends - But benchmarking your Sales FTEs per $1 billion in revenue is a great starting point.
Looking for sales benchmarks? Access trusted database
In this article, we’ll break down what the metric means, how it’s calculated, what benchmarks look like across industries, and how sales leaders can use it to make smarter decisions about team design, resource allocation, and future growth.
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue is a benchmarking metric that tells sales leaders the number of salespeople needed to generate $1 billion of revenue. In essence, it measures the productivity of a sales organization by correlating headcount with financial performance.
FTE refers to a single full-time employee, or a combination of multiple part-time jobs that constitute one full-time job. Importantly, this metric typically includes those employees whose primary job is selling, and excludes those involved in marketing and trade responsibilities that are not directly part of the sales efforts.
The equation is straightforward and can be applied to any organization size, as long as there is available sales headcount and annual revenue data. Scaling sales headcount based on revenue allows managers to compare themselves to peers, and whether or not their team size is appropriate.
Here is the formula: Sales FTEs ÷ Revenue (in billions)
For example, a firm with $2 billion in revenue and 50 FTEs of sales would calculate:
50 ÷ 2 = 25 Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue
This measure is significant because it highlights how effectively an organization is deploying its sales resources. Too many sales FTEs per $1B may indicate overstaffing or inefficiency, whereas a lower number may indicate higher productivity per salesperson - or perhaps understaffing if revenue growth is being constrained.
By tracking this metric, executives can benchmark themselves against peers, across industries, or against their own historical performance, with the knowledge of whether their sales organization is operating at, above, or below expected efficiency. It also drives staffing plans, guides budgeting and resource allocation, allows for revenue forecasting at scale, and helps in the identification of areas where sales activity may be misaligned from revenue outcomes.
In brief, it gives sales leaders a quantifiable way to balance productivity and cost so that they can make sure their organizations are streamlined to generate both revenue growth and operating efficiency.
Benchmarking your sales FTEs to revenue doesn't have to be complicated. Sales executives can simply see how their company compares to industry benchmarks, identify improvement opportunities, and make resource and staffing decisions by following a simple, three-step process.
Identify which roles to include, only counting full-time equivalents that are directly responsible for sales and excluding marketing or trade functions. While sales activities vary by industry, here are the standard things that we look for:
Use the formula: Number of Sales FTEs ÷ Revenue (in billions) to compute your company's Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue.
Refer to industry benchmarks from APQC, CompanySights, or in-house databases to see where how your Sales team stacks up, and evaluate your efficiency against peers.
Ready to benchmark your Sales team? Get started here
We'll walk through two case studies deisgned to illustrate how benchmarking the number of Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue can lead to huge improvements in sales force effectiveness.
An established office supplies distributor generating approximately $3 billion in annual revenue.
The company employed 90 sales FTEs, resulting in 30 Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue.
Industry benchmarks for the office services and supplies sector typically range from 20 to 25 Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue, indicating that the company was operating above the average.
To enhance sales efficiency, the company implemented the following strategies:
Post-implementation, the company reduced its Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue to 22, aligning more closely with industry benchmarks. This adjustment led to a 12% increase in revenue per FTE and a 15% reduction in operational costs associated with the sales function.
A leading personal care products manufacturer with annual revenues of $2.5 billion.
The company employed 65 sales FTEs, resulting in 26 Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue.
Industry benchmarks for the personal care products sector typically range from 18 to 22 Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue, indicating that the company was operating slightly above the average.
To enhance sales efficiency, the company implemented the following strategies:
After implementing these changes, the company reduced its Sales FTEs per $1B in revenue to 20, achieving a more efficient sales structure. This restructuring led to a 10% increase in revenue per FTE and a 5% improvement in customer satisfaction scores.
See how your sales team stacks up - Explore benchmarks
Being aware of the right sales FTE to revenue ratio is critical to driving productivity, growing successfully, and having your sales team aligned with business goals. Here are some common use cases for using benchmarks:
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue enables leaders to understand when to add new headcount as revenue grows. Knowing how many sales reps are typically needed to produce a certain amount of revenue enables organizations to establish revenue milestones that trigger adding new headcount. It avoids growing the team inefficiently without over-staffing or under-staffing strategic accounts.
When forecasting revenue growth, this metric allows sales leaders to estimate the amount of added FTEs needed in order to maintain productivity and coverage. For example, if forecasted revenue growth is expected to be 15%, by applying benchmark ratios, one can determine the number of new sales reps that are needed in order to meet demand without losing efficiency.
Tracking historical Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue over time offers insights into trends in productivity. Leaders should monitor revenue per salesperson to be aware when the metric is rising, flattening, or declining. By doing this Sales leaders can flag staff inefficiencies, staff imbalances, or market changes that require action early on.
This metric is also beneficial when executing organizational or sales transformation initiatives. Having a baseline of Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue provides a basis for tracking progress, identifying areas of improvement, and assessing the influence of transformation on overall productivity and revenue growth.
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue is most effectively used as a starting point for analysis from which leaders can make adjustments with consideration for industry, sales model, and company stage.
Regular trend monitoring and periodic updates are also necessary. A single point-in-time reading can be misleading, as your sales team configuration, revenue, and productivity fluctuate over time. Trend monitoring from a historical perspective enables leaders to identify changes in efficiency, mark potential issues, and make pro-action adjustments.
Finally, segmenting the metric by geography, product category, or customer segment ensures that different go-to-market moves are reasonably compared. Sales FTEs per $1B of revenue can vary dramatically across regions, product categories, or account types, and analyzing these segments separately provides a better sense of efficiency.
There are a few common pitfalls that can reduce the value of this metric. One such pitfall is benchmarking it against an unknown industry or company size. For example, the benchmark for a small SaaS company will not be relevant for a multinational consumer goods company - These industries operate very differently.
Another risk is over-optimization for performance, but in a way that neglects key sales FTE drivers like ramp time, quota targets, or rep productivity. Reducing headcount only to hit a metric can fail if it leads to missed targets or too much work for the remaining employees.
Finally, the human element is something most companies ignore. New reps accelerate over time, sales cycles are random, and the quality of sales activity varies by individual. These subtle differences cannot be captured with just numbers, and therefore it’s important to collate and consider qualitative information as well.
Adhering to these best practices and avoiding pitfalls, sales leaders will be able to utilize Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue in a fact-based, informed way while having a realistic understanding of team capacity and performance.
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue is a powerful metric that enables sales leaders to view how efficiently their teams are generating revenue relative to headcount. By tracking and benchmarking this metric, firms can understand whether they are overstaffed, understaffed, or optimally efficient, and make data-driven hiring, capacity planning, and resource allocation decisions.
Be the most informed Sales leader – Search benchmarks
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue measures the number of full-time sales employees required to generate $1 billion in revenue, serving as a key indicator of sales efficiency and staffing effectiveness.
Divide the total number of sales FTEs by revenue (in billions). The formula is: Sales FTEs ÷ Revenue ($B) = Sales FTEs per $1B.
There is no broad industry average, as the number of Sales FTEs varies significantly based on industry, geography, and company size.
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue helps Sales leaders to assess their team efficiency, identify optimization opportunities, and make data-driven decisions about hiring and resource allocation.
There is no “good benchmark”, as the number of Sales headcount required varies significantly based on industry, geography, and company size.
Sales FTE efficiency varies widely due to industry-specific dynamics. For example, technology and financial services companies often have a higher revenue per Sales FTE, while retail and manufacturing companies often require more Sales FTEs to produce the same amount of revenue due to different sales cycles and deal sizes.
Sales FTEs per $1B in Revenue and Revenue per Sales FTE both measure Sales staffing efficiency presented in different ways. They provide an overall view of sales force effectiveness.
A company should add FTEs when revenue growth exceeds current team capacity, sales metrics indicate strain, or market expansion and new products require additional coverage (Advantexe).
Part-time staff, outsourced roles, differences in revenue recognition, and the inclusion or exclusion of support roles can distort the metric, so consistent definitions are crucial for meaningful insights.
Comparing internal metrics with industry benchmarks can highlight inefficiencies, inform headcount requirements, and support decisions on training, incentives, and resource allocation.
.svg)
Download a copy of our latest all industry report with data to benchmark the Finance, HR, IT and Marketing functions.
Insights are just around the corner.
.svg)
.svg)
