Field guide

Reading the Performance Dashboard

Every number on this page is derived from your athletes' real device data and your organization's benchmarks. This guide explains exactly how Composite scores and Readiness are calculated, why they turn red, amber, or green, and how your metric selection changes what you see.

The dashboard shows two headline numbers that look similar but answer different questions. Composite asks "how good is this squad, against benchmarks?" Readiness asks "how fresh is this athlete, against their own baseline?" Keep that distinction in mind — it explains almost every "why don't these agree?" question.

00 / ORIENTATION

What you're looking at

The dashboard is scoped by the filter chain at the top — Department → Team → Position group → Athlete. Everything below recalculates for whatever scope you've selected. The two interpretive anchors are:

Composite Summary cards — one 0–100 score per performance system (Power, Force, Strength, Speed & Load, Movement), with a point trend and a colored tier bar.
Objective Readiness gauge — a single 0–100 freshness read for the athletes in scope, broken into four weighted sub-scores.

Both are computed on the server from warehouse data — the cards only render the result. The sections below open each one up.

01 / COMPOSITE SCORE

How a Composite score is calculated

A Composite is a 0–100 index anchored to your benchmark tiers. It is not a percentile and not a z-score. Every metric value is placed on the same universal scale using three anchor points from your Sport Benchmarks:

The universal 0–100 tier scale

Average

Good

100

Elite

A value that sits exactly at your Average tier scores 60. At Good it scores 80. At Elite it scores 100. Values between anchors are interpolated in a straight line; below Average, the score falls linearly toward 0. The scale is direction-aware — for metrics where lower is better (sprint times, asymmetry), a smaller value earns the higher score.

From one metric to a system score

A performance system like Power usually contains several metrics. Each selected metric's squad-average value is converted to a tier score, then combined into a coverage-weighted mean — each metric is weighted by how many athletes actually have it recorded. This stops a test with only a handful of results from swinging the whole squad's score.

Worked example — Power composite for a squad of 18

Metric	Tier score	Athletes (weight)	score × weight
Peak power	84	18	1512
CMJ jump height	76	18	1368
Bar velocity @ load	90	6	540
Weighted total		42	3420

composite = 3420 ÷ 42 = 81.4 → rounded → 81 / 100

▲ 81

Note how bar velocity — a strong score of 90 but recorded for only 6 athletes — pulls the composite up only slightly. Its weight (6) is small next to the two 18-athlete metrics.

The combined composite (leaderboards)

The Trending Up / Down, Leaderboard, and Cellar cards rank individual athletes. Each athlete's combined composite is the average of their own per-system scores across the metrics in view — so an athlete's rank reflects their all-round standing, not any single test.

02 / METRIC SELECTION

How your metric selection changes the score

The Customize button controls which metrics feed the dashboard, and that selection directly shapes every Composite. Because a composite is a weighted mean of the metrics you've chosen, adding or removing a metric changes the average.

Only selected metrics count. Deselect a metric and it drops out of every system it fed — the remaining metrics are re-averaged.
A metric can feed more than one system. A velocity metric, for example, contributes to both Speed & Load and Power. The "+n / Also feeds" tag in the customize panel shows these secondary systems.
Only benchmarked metrics are scored. A selected metric with no Average tier configured is still listed, but it can't be placed on the 0–100 scale, so it's excluded from the composite. A system with no benchmarked metrics in scope disappears entirely.
Selection is saved per team. Your chosen view persists for that organization and department; teammates see the sport's default set until they customize their own.

→

Practical consequence: two coaches looking at the same team can see different Composite numbers if they've selected different metrics. That's expected — each composite is only ever a summary of the metrics currently in view. The leaderboard tooltips say this explicitly: "…across the selected metrics."

03 / COMPOSITE TRENDS

What a composite trend means

Under each Composite score is a signed figure like ▲ 8 pts. This is the change in the composite index across the selected window — and critically, it is measured in score points, not percent. A "+8 pts" means the squad's 0–100 index rose by 8 points over the window; it does not mean an 8% change in any raw metric.

How the trend is built

Each metric's own history is converted point-by-point to tier scores.
Series are resampled onto a shared 16-point timeline and combined with the same coverage weighting.
Delta = last point − first point of that combined series.

The window & direction

▲ rising · window default 30 days

The window follows the date-range picker — 7-Day, 30-Day, Season, or a custom range — and the trend label updates to match. Direction is shown as ▲ for a rising index, ▼ for a falling one, and a muted bar when flat. The same point-delta logic drives the Trending Up and Trending Down athlete leaderboards.

04 / RED · AMBER · GREEN

What makes a Composite red, amber, or green

A Composite card's color comes straight from its rounded 0–100 score, with one extra rule that catches a squad sliding backwards even while still scoring well:

ON TRACK

Score ≥ 80 (at or above your Good tier) and not declining. The squad is performing at a strong benchmark level.

WATCH

Score 60–79 (between Average and Good) — or a score of 80+ that has fallen by 5 points or more over the window. The second half is the early-warning rule: a strong-but-slipping squad flips to Watch before it drops below Good.

FLAG

Score < 60 (below your Average tier). Performance in this system is under the benchmark floor.

The thin bar under each score marks the same two thresholds you see above — a tick at 60 (Average) and 80 (Good) — so you can read where the score sits relative to the tiers at a glance, and the bar's fill color matches the status.

Individual metric cards use a slightly different test

A single metric card (in the grid or trend table) is colored by comparing the value in view — squad, position group, or one athlete — directly against your benchmark tiers: at/above Good is On Track, between Average and Good is Watch, below Average is Flag. There's no point-decline rule here, and metrics with no benchmark configured show no status at all.

05 / READINESS

How Readiness is calculated

Objective Readiness is a 0–100 freshness score that answers "is this athlete recovered and cleared to train hard today?" It is a weighted mean of up to four sub-scores, each measured against the athlete's own recent baseline rather than against a squad or a benchmark. If a sub-score has no data, its weight is dropped and the remaining weights are renormalized, so partial data still yields a valid score.

Objective Readiness — worked example

Ready

Neuromuscular freshness 45%88

Acute : chronic load 25%100

Bar velocity @ load 15%78

Movement asymmetry 15%100

(88×.45) + (100×.25) + (78×.15) + (100×.15) = 39.6 + 25 + 11.7 + 15 = 91 / 100 → Ready

What feeds each sub-score

Neuromuscular freshness (45%) — jump-test signals from VALD ForceDecks (CMJ height, RSI-modified, peak & relative peak power). The latest test is compared to the mean of recent prior tests; at baseline scores ≈82, and roughly ±8% off baseline moves it ±20 points.
Acute : chronic load — ACWR (25%) — the ratio of a rolling 7-day training load to the 28-day chronic load. Scored: 0.8–1.3 = 100 (the "sweet spot"), <0.8 = 88 (fresh but undertrained), 1.3–1.5 = 72, >1.5 = 50 (spike / overload risk). Needs ≥21 days of history to compute.
Bar velocity at load (15%) — velocity-based training data from Perch, compared to the athlete's velocity baseline.
Movement asymmetry (15%) — worst inter-limb asymmetry from NordBord / ForceFrame: under 8% scores 100, up to 15% scores 80, beyond that 55.

The squad-level gauge is the mean of each athlete's score, computed over a 365-day input lookback. The trend read-out (Improving / Stable / Declining) comes from the neuromuscular signal versus baseline.

Readiness bands

READY · ≥ 70

Fresh and cleared to train.

CAUTION · 50–69

Modify the session.

LOW · < 50

Prioritize recovery.

Is this based on a professional readiness meter?

Honest answer: it is an athoz-built formula, grounded in established sports-science concepts but not a licensed or published "readiness meter." Here's the precise picture so you can represent it accurately to your staff:

The load component is industry-standard. The acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) — 7-day acute load over 28-day chronic load, with a ~0.8–1.3 "sweet spot" and elevated risk above 1.5 — is a widely used concept across professional sports science.
The rest is athoz-tuned. The four-way weighting (45/25/15/15), the freshness curve, and the sub-score cutoffs are athoz's own constants — deterministic and consistent across the platform, but not drawn from a specific peer-reviewed protocol.
Why it's trustworthy: it's objective (device-measured, no self-report surveys), it's measured against each athlete's own baseline rather than a generic population, and it's fully deterministic — the same inputs always produce the same score, so it's auditable via the detail modal.

Recommended framing for athletes and staff: describe it as "an objective, device-based freshness indicator" rather than a clinical or medically validated readiness measure. It's a training-decision aid, not a diagnostic.

06 / ONE PALETTE, THREE MEANINGS

Why the same colors mean different things

Green, amber, and red appear in three places on this dashboard, and each answers a different question. This is the single most common source of "why don't these agree?" — so it's worth holding all three side by side.

Where	Compares…	Green means
Composite card	0–100 index vs. tiers (60 / 80) + decline check	≥80, steady
Metric card	value in view vs. benchmark tiers	≥ Good tier
Readiness	athlete freshness vs. own baseline	≥70 Ready

So an athlete can be Low on Readiness (fatigued today, relative to their own recent form) while still sitting On Track on a Composite (their benchmark-level output is strong). Both are true — one is about freshness now, the other about standard achieved.