When pitching investors or deciding your go-to-market strategy, few numbers carry more weight than your market size. Yet many founders either wildly exaggerate or under-estimate it—leading to credibility gaps or missed opportunities.

This guide is meant to be the definitive playbook: no fluff, no vague “industry talk,” just practical frameworks, worked examples, and templates you can adapt to your own startup or business.

In this guide you’ll learn:

• What TAM, SAM, SOM really mean (and what they don’t)
  
  
• The core frameworks behind top-down and bottom-up sizing
  
  
• A step-by-step method to calculate each using your own data
  
  
• Common mistakes (and how to avoid them)
  
  
• How to present your market size credibly (e.g. in pitch decks or internal planning)
  
  

By the end you’ll not just know these terms—you’ll be able to defend them with logic, not guesswork.

‍

Why TAM, SAM, and SOM Matter for Founders

The role of market sizing in strategy and fundraising

• Investor validation. A large but realistic TAM signals scale potential. But investors don’t just judge your numbers—they judge your reasoning.
  
  
• Focus & prioritization. Market sizing forces you to choose segments, geographies, customer types, and scope.
  
  
• Goal setting. Your SAM and SOM help you set realistic roadmaps, not arbitrary “go big or go home” targets.
  
  
• Resource allocation. If your SOM is small relative to your budget, you’ll know you need to refine your positioning or go-to-market.
  
  

Misconceptions and dangers

Pro Tip: Always present both a conservative and an optimistic scenario. The gap between them shows you’ve stress-tested your assumptions.

‍

The Core Framework: TAM, SAM, and SOM Defined

This section defines each term in depth and walks through the conceptual flow.

TAM — Total Addressable Market (or Total Available Market)

Definition: The total revenue opportunity if you achieved 100% market share within your targeted universe (ignoring constraints).

Key points:

• TAM is a theoretical ceiling, not a realistic goal.
  
  
• It gives context to how large the opportunity could be over time.
  
  
• You can compute it via top-down (industry data) or bottom-up (your pricing × number of potential customers) methods—or both.
  
  

SAM — Serviceable (or Served) Addressable Market

Definition: The portion of the TAM you can realistically serve given your current business model, product features, geography, or constraints.

In other words, SAM narrows the TAM by applying realistic filters:

• Geography (only some countries or regions)
  
  
• Customer segment or verticals (you might not serve all industries)
  
  
• Product limitations (some features work only for certain customers)
  
  
• Distribution constraints (channels you can realistically penetrate) 

SOM — Serviceable Obtainable Market (or Share of Market)

Definition: The slice of your SAM you can actually capture (in a defined timeframe), considering competition, market dynamics, marketing budget, adoption rates, and execution.

SOM is your achievable target, often over 1–5 years or near-term. It should be grounded in defensible assumptions, not wishful percentages. 

‍

Step-by-Step: How to Calculate TAM, SAM, and SOM

Here’s a roadmap you can follow using your own data.

Step 1: Define your market universe & target segments

Before numbers, you need clarity:

1. Who is your ideal customer profile (ICP)?
   
   
2. What geographies or verticals will you target initially?
   
   
3. What product scope or use cases will you offer support at first?
   
   

With that, you can define the “universe” you’re measuring.

E.g. “Small to mid-sized eCommerce brands in Southeast Asia using SaaS marketing automation tools.”

Step 2: Estimate TAM (top-down + bottom-up)

Top-Down Approach

1. Find credible industry reports (e.g. from Gartner, IDC, Statista, McKinsey) for the broad category (e.g. “global marketing automation spend”).
   
   
2. Apply filters to align with your scope (e.g. percent of that spend relevant to your specific SaaS use case or region).
   
   
3. Derive a TAM figure.
   
   

Pros: Fast, uses existing data.
Cons: Often coarse, may not align tightly with your niche.

Bottom-Up Approach (preferred by investors)

1. Estimate number of potential customers in your universe (e.g. number of eCommerce stores in target region).
   
   
2. Estimate average revenue (or average contract value) per customer per period (e.g. per year).
   
   
3. Multiply:
   \text{TAM} = (\text{# potential customers}) \times (\text{average revenue per customer})

Because you identify your assumptions explicitly, bottom-up looks more defensible in investor decks.

Cross-check: Your bottom-up and top-down TAM should be in the same order of magnitude. If they diverge hugely, revisit assumptions.

Step 3: Narrow to SAM

From your TAM, apply filters based on:

• Geographical reach: perhaps you only launch in 3 countries out of 10 in your TAM.
  
  
• Product fit: you may only initially support specific use cases or verticals.
  
  
• Customer readiness / adoption willingness: Only a subset of your TAM is “serviceable” today.
  
  
• Distribution & channel constraints: only customers reachable via your channels.
  
  

So:

SAM=TAM×(percent reachable by your filters)\text{SAM} = \text{TAM} \times (\text{percent reachable by your filters})SAM=TAM×(percent reachable by your filters)

Alternatively, you can build SAM bottom-up: estimate count of reachable customers × ARPU.

Step 4: Estimate SOM (your captureable share)

Now you make a realistic projection about how much of the SAM you can win, considering:

• Competitive landscape and market share of incumbents
  
  
• Your marketing & sales budget
  
  
• Time needed to ramp
  
  
• Adoption curves and conversion rates
  
  
• Barriers to entry
  
  

Common ways to derive SOM:

• Percentage of SAM approach: E.g., “We aim to capture 1 % of SAM by year 3.”
  
  
• Customer-acquisition projection: Estimate number of customers you can realistically acquire × ARPU.
  
  
• Ramp models: Year-by-year capture rates (e.g. 0.1 % in Year 1, 0.5 % in Year 2, 1 % in Year 3).
  
  

Always document your logic and sensitivity to assumptions.

‍

Worked Example: SaaS for Marketing Teams in Southeast Asia

Let’s walk through a simplified example:

Assumptions / Universe definition:

• Target: mid-market marketing teams in eCommerce across Southeast Asia (SEA)
  
  
• Countries: Indonesia, Philippines, Malaysia
  
  
• Potential companies: 20,000 mid-sized eCommerce brands across those countries
  
  
• Annual SaaS ARPU: US $3,000
  
  

TAM (bottom-up)

• 20,000 potential customers × $3,000 = $60 million TAM
  
  

If you checked a top-down industry source and found SEA digital marketing tools market is $80M, your 60M figure is plausible.

SAM

Let’s say you only launch in the Philippines and Malaysia initially, which cover 50% of that universe:

• SAM = $60M × 50% = $30 million
  
  

You further restrict to only those who are growth-phase (say 60% of that):

• Adjusted SAM = $30M × 60% = $18 million
  
  

SOM

You project:

• Year 1: acquire 100 customers (100 × $3,000 = $300,000)
  
  
• Year 2: 500 customers → $1.5M
  
  
• Year 3: 1,500 customers → $4.5M
  
  

Thus, by Year 3 your SOM = $4.5 million, which is 25% of the SAM.

You can also express it as “25% share of reachable SAM within 3 years.”

This gives you a concrete target for hiring, CAC, and growth trajectories.

‍

Checklist: What You Must Do to Build Credible TAM/SAM/SOM

• Define your ideal target customer (ICP) clearly
  
  
• Decide on geography, verticals, and product scope
  
  
• Use both top-down and bottom-up methods for TAM
  
  
• Filter TAM by reachability to get SAM
  
  
• Estimate SOM based on realistic acquisition models
  
  
• Document all multipliers, data sources, and assumptions
  
  
• Sketch best, base, and conservative scenarios
  
  
• Run sensitivity analysis to see how changes in assumptions affect outcomes
  
  
• Revisit your TAM/SAM/SOM at least annually as data improves
  
  

Common Mistakes to Avoid (with fixes)

Mistake 1: Inflating SOM by choosing a generic “5 % of market” assumption

Why it happens: Founders want an impressive number for pitch decks.
Fix: Base SOM on real acquisition forecasts, competitive analysis, and ramping constraints.

Mistake 2: Only using top-down data

Why it happens: It’s easier; reports are readily available.
Fix: Always pair with bottom-up logic so you can explain how you got there.

Mistake 3: Not accounting for adoption curve / time to penetration

Why it happens: People treat SOM as if it applies immediately.
Fix: Build a ramp (Year 1, 2, 3) and show your assumptions.

Mistake 4: Mixing scopes across TAM, SAM, SOM incorrectly

Why it happens: Confusion about what “serviceable” means.
Fix: Enforce the rule: TAM ≥ SAM ≥ SOM. Filter step by step.

Mistake 5: Forgetting to annotate assumptions

Why it happens: You remember logic internally but don’t write it down.
Fix: Always include footnotes or side boxes explaining “Why x %?”

‍

How to Present Your TAM/SAM/SOM (Especially in a Pitch Deck)

• Use concentric circles or a funnel graphic to show TAM → SAM → SOM
  
  
• Include a short “assumptions box” (e.g. number of customers, ARPU, conversion estimates)
  
  
• Show both base and upside scenarios
  
  
• Tie SOM to financial projections or go-to-market plans
  
  
• Use the TAM only as context—not your target
  
  
• In your narrative, walk the audience through your filter logic (geography → segment → product fit → share)
  
  

Many pitch-deck frameworks expect a “market opportunity” slide with TAM, SAM, and SOM. But the real test is whether your assumptions hold up when pressed.

When & How to Revisit Your Market Size

As your product, team, or data matures:

• Every 6–12 months, revisit your customer count, ARPU, and assumptions
  
  
• When entering new regions or verticals, expand your SAM, then recompute SOM
  
  
• When you collect actual sales data, shift toward more bottom-up modeling
  
  
• Use sensitivity analysis (e.g. ±20% on every multiplier) to understand risk
  
  

‍

Summary & Next Steps

Key Takeaways

• TAM is the maximum legal revenue opportunity (if you had full share)
  
  
• SAM filters TAM to what you can actually serve given constraints
  
  
• SOM is your realistic share of SAM over a timeframe
  
  
• The bottom-up approach, with documented assumptions, is usually more credible
  
  
• Always annotate filters, ramp models, and sensitivity
  
  
• Use TAM as context, not as your goal
  
  

Now it’s your turn:

1. Start building your own TAM/SAM/SOM using the steps above
   
   
2. Draft a scenario (base / stretch) and test sensitivities
   
   
3. Integrate into your pitch or internal plan
   
   

If you found this useful, sign up for our newsletter to get our Startup Validation Checklist (free download) and regular frameworks you can apply immediately.