Example Facility

About this report

Where this data comes from

Your facility's public Google reviews. Each review is read and tagged with the themes it mentions and the sentiment of each mention, then scored with the formulas described below. The benchmark is built the same way from a representative sample of pickleball facilities across the United States. Non-participating facilities are never named and appear only inside aggregates.

Mention

One theme raised in one review. A single review usually contains several mentions. Shares are "% of mentions," not "% of reviews." Only written reviews feed sentiment scores; star ratings count every review.

Positive and negative sentiment

Positive (or negative) mentions as a share of all mentions of that theme or dimension, 0-100.

Industry median

The midpoint of the benchmark facilities: half sit above it, half below. A grey chip on a tile means you sit exactly at the median being compared. Every median on this page follows the "Compare against" selector at the top, and the caption under each number names the group it is using, so "industry median" becomes "Midwest median" when you pick Midwest. The two exceptions are labelled: sections marked * and theme rows marked "vs all".

Industry rank

Your position among the benchmark facilities, ordered by positive sentiment. Rank 1 is the highest score. "Tied" means at least one other facility holds the same score. This also follows the selector: pick a region and you are ranked within that region only, out of a smaller number of facilities.

"6 months ago"

The same measure rebuilt from only the reviews you had six months ago, so the tiles and the Scorecard's "6 mo ago" column show what the number actually was back then. For your star rating that is the figure your Google listing displayed at the time. It is a past value, not a rating of your direction, which is why it carries no colour or arrow. We leave the comparison out entirely when your review history does not reach back that far, or when either side has fewer than 5 mentions, rather than compare against too little evidence. Roughly one facility in five in this benchmark is too new to have it.

Owner engagement

Facilities that answer more of their reviews carry a smaller share of negative reviews (about 4 percent for the most responsive quarter versus 10 percent for those that never respond). That is an association, not proof of cause; replying to reviews is also Google's own recommended practice.

First-time visitors

Reviews whose text describes a first visit ("first time here," "never played before"). Skill words like "beginner" alone do not count.

Unanswered critical reviews

Reviews of 3 stars or fewer that contain at least one negative comment on a tracked theme and have no owner reply. Filter for them in Comment Analysis.

Top and bottom facilities

In the "what top facilities do" table: the top and bottom quarters of the benchmark by positive sentiment. The behaviors shown are the ones that track with higher sentiment across the benchmark.

Executive summary

One paragraph of where you stand, your biggest gaps, and the moves your reviews point to. Every figure in it is measured from the benchmark's own review data. From Month 2 it also draws on your operations survey.

Not enough data

Fewer than 5 mentions in the scored window. We show nothing rather than a score built on too little evidence.

Sections marked *

The comparison selector at the top of the report repoints your tiles and theme scores at a narrower group, such as your region. The executive summary and "what top facilities do" always compare you against all 81 benchmark facilities, whatever is selected. Both rank what to fix first, and that ranking should not change based on how you are filtering the page. Individual themes marked "vs all" on the Scorecard are the same idea at the row level: fewer than 10 facilities in the selected group score that theme, so the whole-industry comparison is kept rather than a median built on a handful of facilities.