Decision Sensitivity Analyser

A weighted decision matrix gives an answer; what it does not give is any sense of how much that answer depends on weights someone chose in a meeting. This scores the options, then sweeps each criterion's weight to find where the winner changes — and rescores the whole decision at that weight rather than estimating it from the margin. The criteria that can flip it are the ones worth arguing about.

Criteria

One per line as "name, weight". The weights are what the analysis varies.

Options

One per line as "name" followed by a score for each criterion, in the same order.

Your result will appear here.

What this generator does

Multiplies each option's scores by the criteria weights to get totals, names the winner, or reports a tie when two options are level as typed, and then varies each criterion's weight across its whole range to find the first weight at which a different option is strictly ahead — drawing level does not count.

How to use this tool

List your criteria with a weight for each.
List your options with a score against every criterion.
Read the winner and its margin.
Read the tipping points — those are the weights that actually matter.

Understanding the controls

Criteria: One per line as a name and a weight. Weights are relative, so what matters is their ratio rather than their scale.
Options: One per line as a name followed by a score for each criterion, in the same order. Any consistent scale works — nought to ten is usual.

Worked examples

Two vendors scored on Price (50), Quality (30) and Support (20): With Vendor A scored 6, 8, 9 and Vendor B 9, 2, 9, Vendor A wins 720 to 690, a margin of 30. Price flips it from a weight of 61, and Quality at a weight of 0 (the sweep starts at zero, and with Quality worth nothing Vendor B is already ahead) — Support cannot flip it at any weight, since both score 9, so it is not one of the two criteria actually worth arguing about.

Common use cases

Testing how robust a weighted decision really is
Finding which criterion's weight is doing the deciding
Focusing a discussion on the weights that change the answer
Checking whether a close decision is close for a real reason
Presenting a decision with its sensitivity rather than just its result

How this generator works

Each option's total is the sum of its scores times the criteria weights. To find a tipping point the tool holds every other weight fixed, sweeps the one in question from zero upwards, and rescores the entire decision at each step — so a reported flip is one that genuinely happens rather than one extrapolated from the margin. Before display the totals are recomputed, the winner is confirmed to have the highest, and every tipping point is re-tested at the weight it names.

Randomness and fairness

Nothing here is random. A set of weights and scores gives exactly one result and one set of tipping points.

For how randomness is produced across the whole site, see how Generate Random works.

Limitations and good to know

One weight is varied at a time, so this misses combinations where two weights move together.
Whole-number weights are swept over whole numbers from zero to a hundred, so a tipping point between two integers is reported at the first whole weight that flips it; decimal weights are swept in steps of their last decimal place.
Scores are taken as given; the sensitivity of the answer to a mis-scored option is a separate question.
A robust answer is not necessarily a right one — it only means the weights are not what is deciding it.

Privacy and your data

The analysis runs in your browser and your criteria, options and scores are never transmitted, stored or included in analytics.