RICE Prioritization — free online maker
Reach × impact × confidence ÷ effort — rank the backlog with arguments, not volume. Guided prompts on every block, autosave in your browser, and one-click PDF export.
30-45 minutes to a first draft5 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 RICE Prioritization?
RICE scores each candidate idea on four factors — how many people it Reaches, how much Impact it has on each, how Confident you are in those estimates, and how much Effort it costs — then ranks by (reach × impact × confidence) ÷ effort. The output is a backlog ordered by expected value per unit of work.
The score is not the point; the argument is. RICE forces every 'we should obviously build X' claim to name its numbers, and most prioritisation fights end the moment both sides write down reach and effort. Treat the final ranking as a strong default you may consciously override, not as arithmetic truth.
Developed by Sean McBride at Intercom (circa 2016) for scoring product roadmap ideas, and since adopted well beyond product management for any ranked-backlog decision.
Use it when…
- A roadmap meeting where the loudest voice keeps winning
- More good ideas than engineers — which is always
- Comparing unlike things: a bug fix, a feature, and a growth experiment
- Explaining to stakeholders why their request is scheduled later
The 5 blocks, in the order to fill them
- 1
Reach
How many people does each idea touch, per period?
For each idea, estimate how many users or customers it affects in a defined period — e.g. customers per quarter.
How to fill this block - 2
Impact
How much difference does it make to each person reached?
Impact on the goal, per person reached, on Intercom's scale: 3 = massive, 2 = high, 1 = medium, 0.5 = low, 0.25 = minimal. Name the goal first (conversion, retention, satisfaction) — impact without a stated goal is vibes.
How to fill this block - 3
Confidence
How much of this is data, and how much is hope?
Discount for uncertainty: 100% = solid data on both reach and impact, 80% = data on one and judgement on the other, 50% = educated guess. Below 50% means you are not prioritising, you are gambling — send that idea to research instead of the backlog.
How to fill this block - 4
Effort
What does each idea cost, in person-months?
Total work across everyone involved — product, design, engineering, QA, launch — in person-months (or person-weeks, applied consistently). Effort is the divisor, so underestimating it inflates a score faster than any other error.
How to fill this block - 5
Ranked Backlog
What does the arithmetic say — and where do you overrule it?
Compute each idea's score — (reach × impact × confidence) ÷ effort — and list them highest first, one note per idea with the working shown. Then apply judgement: dependencies, strategy, and commitments may reorder items, but every override gets written down with its reason.
How to fill this block
Worked RICE 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.
RICE FAQs
How is a RICE score calculated?
Score = (Reach × Impact × Confidence) ÷ Effort. Reach is people affected per period, impact uses Intercom's 3/2/1/0.5/0.25 scale, confidence is 100%/80%/50%, and effort is person-months of total work. Higher scores mean more expected value per unit of work. The formula's job is to make assumptions explicit — the number itself is a default ranking, not a verdict.
What is a good RICE score?
There is no absolute threshold — scores only mean anything relative to the other ideas scored with the same period and units. What matters is the ordering and the gaps: an idea scoring 5,000 against a field of 300s is a clear call, while two ideas at 900 and 950 are a coin flip that judgement should settle.
RICE vs ICE vs MoSCoW — which should I use?
ICE (impact, confidence, ease) is RICE without reach — faster and cruder, fine for quick triage. MoSCoW (must/should/could/won't) buckets requirements rather than ranking them, which suits scope negotiation better than roadmap ordering. RICE is the most rigorous of the three because reach and effort force real numbers; use it when the decision is expensive enough to argue about.
What are the main pitfalls of RICE?
Fabricated reach numbers, impact scored on the best case instead of the average user, effort estimated by optimism, and treating the output as arithmetic truth. RICE also structurally undervalues strategic bets with a small initial reach — score them honestly, then override explicitly with the reason written down, rather than inflating the inputs to get the answer you wanted.