Ansoff Matrix — free online maker
Four routes to growth, ordered by how much risk each one carries. Guided prompts on every block, autosave in your browser, and one-click PDF export.
20-30 minutes to a first draft4 blocks How to fill it in
Saved to this browser
Tip: drag a note onto another block to move it, press Enter to add, or paste a list to create several notes at once. Everything saves automatically to this browser.
What is the Ansoff Matrix?
The Ansoff Matrix lays out the only four ways a business can grow, along two axes: existing or new products, existing or new markets. Sell more of what you have to who you already serve, sell new things to existing customers, take existing products to new markets, or do both at once.
Its real contribution is the risk ordering. Each step away from what you already know multiplies uncertainty, and diversification — new product, new market — carries both risks simultaneously. Ansoff's own point was that it is by far the riskiest quadrant and is chosen far more often than the evidence justifies.
Created by Igor Ansoff and published in a 1957 Harvard Business Review article, 'Strategies for Diversification'. It is one of the oldest strategy frameworks still in routine use.
Use it when…
- Deciding where next year's growth is supposed to come from
- Sanity-checking a growth plan that has quietly become a diversification plan
- Comparing several growth options on a common risk scale
- Board or investor conversations about growth strategy
The 4 blocks, in the order to fill them
- 1
Market Penetration
Existing products, existing markets — how do we sell more?
Lowest risk, because you already understand both the product and the customer. Growth comes from higher usage, higher share, better retention, or better pricing.
How to fill this block - 2
Product Development
New products, existing markets — what else do they need?
Moderate risk: you know the customer, you do not know whether you can build and sell the new thing profitably. This is usually the strongest second option, because your existing relationships give you a distribution advantage and cheap access to research.
How to fill this block - 3
Market Development
Existing products, new markets — who else needs this?
Moderate risk in the other direction: the product is proven, the customer is not. New markets can mean new geographies, new segments, new industries, or new use cases for the same thing.
How to fill this block - 4
Diversification
New products, new markets — is it worth the risk?
Highest risk, because both variables change at once and you have no existing knowledge to fall back on. Related diversification retains some link to what you already do; unrelated diversification retains none and behaves more like an investment decision than a strategy.
How to fill this block
Worked Ansoff examples
Complete, realistic canvases with an analysis of what each one reveals. Open one on its own page, or load it straight into the editor above.
Ansoff FAQs
What are the four quadrants of the Ansoff Matrix?
Market penetration (existing products, existing markets), product development (new products, existing markets), market development (existing products, new markets), and diversification (new products, new markets). They are ordered by risk: penetration is lowest, diversification is highest because both variables change at once.
Which quadrant should I start with?
Market penetration, almost always. It is the cheapest growth available and the most commonly skipped, because selling more to people who already buy from you feels less exciting than a launch. Work outward only once you can show that this quadrant is genuinely exhausted.
Why is diversification considered so risky?
Because you lose both anchors at once. In every other quadrant you keep either product knowledge or customer knowledge to steer by; in diversification you keep neither, so the usual error-correction loops do not work. Ansoff's 1957 paper made exactly this point, and it remains the most-ignored part of the framework.
Can I pursue more than one quadrant at a time?
Yes, and most companies do — but weight them deliberately. A common allocation is the bulk of resource on penetration, a meaningful minority on product or market development, and a small, explicitly capped bet on diversification. The failure pattern is an unstated drift where diversification quietly consumes the attention that penetration needed.