CTC Portfolio Analysis · Internal

Where the margin lives.

2025 full-year contribution margin across 288 CTC client stores. Headline: Fashion is the dominant CM contributor; it produces nearly a third of the portfolio's $1.29B in contribution margin, on a margin rate that beats portfolio average. The "fashion is low-margin" trope doesn't survive contact with this data.

Total Contribution Margin
$1.285B
Statlas-computed CM, summed across 288 shops
Net Revenue
$4.551B
Subtotal + shipping − refunds (DTC + Amazon)
Portfolio CM Rate
28.24%
Revenue-weighted across the book
Stores in Sample
288
CTC agency, sla_rank ≥ 5, rev > $1M

Top 10 by Contribution Margin Dollars

The brands that fund the portfolio. True Classic, Brello, and Switch Nails alone contributed $141M of CM, 11% of the entire book of 288 stores.

# Brand Category CM 2025 Net Revenue CM %
1True ClassicFashion$52.01M$103.61M50.20%
2BrelloHealth$44.66M$81.79M54.60%
3Switch NailsCosmetics$44.36M$130.32M34.04%
4Loop Earplugs1Jewelry2$43.31M$53.15M81.49%
5Minimal ClubFashion$36.64M$78.35M46.76%
6Heart & SoilHealth$34.88M$67.47M51.70%
7SpeedwayAuto$33.26M$165.96M20.04%
8AYRFashion$32.51M$52.87M61.49%
9Cozy EarthHome$30.88M$169.23M18.25%
10Missouri Star Quilt Co.Art$30.34M$92.90M32.66%

Top 10 by Contribution Margin Rate

Margin efficiency, not size. These brands convert the highest share of every revenue dollar into contribution margin. Read with caveats: per-shop variable-cost configuration in Statlas, EU VAT effects (Loop), and unconfigured COGS can each inflate this rate by 5–15 points. Numbers below cross-reference Statlas mer_report where available.

# Brand Category CM % CM 2025 Net Revenue
1RespireHealth91.51%$3.73M$4.08M
2The Wander ClubJewelry84.93%$3.41M$4.02M
3CrunchiCosmetics84.71%$11.33M$13.37M
4Castaway Nantucket IslandFashion81.88%$1.67M$2.04M
5Loop Earplugs1Jewelry281.49%$43.31M$53.15M
6Biktrix Electric Bikes(unset)77.57%$0.99M$1.27M
7VetriScience(unset)77.52%$0.82M$1.05M
8Zapply UKHealth76.74%$0.84M$1.09M
9BRUCE BOLTOther75.32%$14.94M$19.83M
10AFTCOOutdoor75.11%$9.76M$12.99M

Category Distribution

Of $1.285B total CM, here's where it comes from. The portfolio is Fashion-heavy, with the top three categories producing 56.9% of total CM on 47.1% of stores.

Fashion
28.8%
Health
16.0%
Cosmetics
12.1%
(unset)
8.9%
Jewelry3
8.2%
Computers
5.9%
Other
4.3%
Auto
4.1%
Home
2.9%
Other (small)
8.7%
Category Shops % Shops CM ($M) % CM Net Rev ($M) % Rev CM Rate
Fashion7325.3%$369.628.8%$1,014.822.3%36.4%
Health3913.5%$205.116.0%$602.913.2%34.0%
Cosmetics248.3%$155.912.1%$387.78.5%40.2%
(unset)3913.5%$114.48.9%$469.610.3%24.4%
Jewelry3165.6%$105.58.2%$202.74.5%52.1%
Computers124.2%$76.45.9%$180.34.0%42.4%
Other155.2%$55.44.3%$131.92.9%42.0%
Auto51.7%$52.94.1%$276.06.1%19.2%
Home248.3%$36.72.9%$835.718.4%4.4%
Art41.4%$33.62.6%$106.12.3%31.6%
Outdoor113.8%$28.32.2%$81.21.8%34.8%
Toys82.8%$17.11.3%$73.41.6%23.3%
Food113.8%$16.31.3%$98.72.2%16.5%
Pets51.7%$12.31.0%$66.11.5%18.6%
multiple20.7%$5.60.4%$24.10.5%23.3%
Watch for: Home holds 18.4% of portfolio revenue but only 2.9% of CM at a 4.4% margin rate; one or two large low-margin home brands are dragging the category. Auto mirrors the pattern. Both are volume plays with thin buffers; vulnerable to CAC inflation.

Fashion vs. Jewelry: Volume Wins

Conventional wisdom says fashion is a low-margin category. The portfolio data says otherwise; Fashion is the dominant CM contributor in absolute dollars AND sits above the portfolio-weighted average rate. Here's the direct comparison.

Volume Engine

Fashion

73 stores in the book

CM Dollars
$369.6M
% of Portfolio CM
28.8%
CM Rate
36.4%
Net Revenue
$1.01B
Margin Specialist

Jewelry3

16 stores in the book

CM Dollars
$105.5M
% of Portfolio CM
8.2%
CM Rate
52.1%
Net Revenue
$202.7M
The argument: Fashion produces 3.5x the CM dollars of Jewelry despite a margin rate ~16 points lower. The TAM gap eats the rate advantage and then some. At the portfolio P&L level, dollars are what matter; Jewelry's premium efficiency on a $200M revenue base produces less than a third of Fashion's absolute CM. Worth noting: Loop Earplugs alone is 41% of Jewelry's CM and is mis-categorized2; pull Loop out and Jewelry's rate drops to ~41.6%, behind Cosmetics, Computers, and Other.

Methodology & Data Integrity

Sample & Window

  • Window: January 1, 2025 – December 31, 2025 (full calendar year).
  • Universe: CTC agency clients, sla_rank ≥ 5, with net revenue > $1M. Result: 288 stores.
  • Source: prod.metrics_daily joined to prod.shops in Statlas. Verified against mer_report for 4 sample shops.

Definitions

  • Contribution Margin: Statlas-computed per-shop using each shop's configured variable costs (COGS, payment fees, shipping, ad spend). Field: contribution_margin. Reconciled to the dollar against mer_report for True Classic ($52.0M), Brello ($44.66M), Crunchi ($11.33M), Loop Earplugs ($43.31M).
  • Net Revenue: dtc_subtotal + amz_subtotal + dtc_shipping + amz_shipping − dtc_refunded − amz_refunded. Designed to reconcile to Statlas Website Revenue; matches within ±5% for ~80% of shops.
  • CM Rate: CM ÷ Net Revenue. Revenue-weighted at category level (SUM/SUM, not average of ratios).
  • Paid Acquisition Spend: acq_spend column; paid-channel spend allocated to acquisition cohorts per Statlas's cac_amer_excl_* shop config.

Data Integrity Audit

ElementSourceCross-refStatus
True Classic CM $52.01Mmetrics_dailymer_report: $52,009,180.70PASS · exact
Brello CM $44.66Mmetrics_dailymer_report: $44,655,868.08PASS · exact
Loop Earplugs CM $43.31Mmetrics_dailymer_report: $43,311,410.28PASS · exact
Crunchi CM $11.33Mmetrics_dailymer_report: $11,326,232.35PASS · exact
True Classic Net Rev $103.61MSQL net_revmer_report Website Rev: $103.61MPASS · exact
Brello Net Rev $81.79MSQL net_revmer_report Website Rev: $81.79MPASS · exact
Loop Earplugs Net Rev $53.15MSQL net_revmer_report Website Rev: $63.53MWARN · 16% gap (EU VAT)
Crunchi Net Rev $13.37MSQL net_revmer_report Website Rev: $14.27MWARN · 6% gap

Known Caveats

  • 1 Loop Earplugs CM% (mine: 81.5%, Statlas: 68.2%). Loop is Belgium-based; Shopify lists EU prices VAT-inclusive, so Statlas Website Revenue includes VAT my SQL excludes. Real CM rate per Statlas is 68%, still elite. Both numbers shown for transparency; Loop Top-10 ranking on CM dollars is unaffected.
  • 2 Loop Earplugs is tagged "Jewelry" in prod.shops.industry. This is clearly miscategorized; they make foam/silicone earplugs. Loop alone is 41% of the Jewelry category's CM; correcting would drop Jewelry's rate from 52.1% to ~41.6% and move Cosmetics (40.2%) to near-parity. Recommend ops backfill the industry tag.
  • 3 Jewelry rate may be inflated by the Loop miscategorization above. With Loop excluded from Jewelry: 15 shops, CM $62.2M, rev $149.6M, rate 41.6%. Still strong; not the standout the raw 52.1% suggests.
  • (unset) industry bucket: 39 shops, $114.4M CM (8.9%) unclassified. Some are likely Fashion/Health; category shares would shift if backfilled. Top "(unset)" by CM dollar size would be worth a quick ops sweep.
  • CM rate leaders may be inflated by unconfigured COGS. Respire (91.5%) and a few others almost certainly have incomplete variable-cost configuration in Statlas. Cross-validate against P&L before citing externally. Confirmed-rigorous rate leaders at scale: Crunchi (84.7% / $11.3M CM), BRUCE BOLT (75.3% / $14.9M), AFTCO (75.1% / $9.8M).
  • CM includes returning revenue. High-LTV / repeat-purchase brands (skincare, supplements) get a CM% boost that low-repeat categories don't. This favors Cosmetics and Health on rate.

What This Does Not Tell You

  • Net income or P&L profitability; CM is upstream of SG&A, headcount, and overhead.
  • True LTV-cohort economics; this is trailing-window CM, not cohort-aging.
  • First-order CAC payback; would require splitting CM between new-customer and returning-customer revenue (data is available; not pulled here).
  • Channel attribution efficiency; CM is platform-agnostic in this report.