Document Type: Framework
Status: Active
Version: v1.1
Authority: Affiliate Brain
Applies To: Affiliate Brain offer scoring, opportunity ranking, structural comparison, and pre-Velocity evaluation discipline
Parent: Affiliate Brain Canon
Last Reviewed: 2026-03-14
Purpose
This framework defines the structured scoring system used to evaluate affiliate offers before Velocity activation.
Its purpose is to transform offer intelligence into a consistent numerical opportunity profile.
This model improves:
• offer comparison
• ranking discipline
• decision consistency
• capital protection
The scoring model does not allocate capital.
It provides structured input into the Velocity Decision Engine.
Scope
This framework applies to:
• Affiliate Brain offer scoring before deeper progression
• comparison of multiple affiliate opportunities
• conversion of offer intelligence into a mechanical score
• ranked prioritisation of opportunities before testing
• disciplined pre-Velocity evaluation
This document governs how offers are scored and interpreted.
It does not govern:
• final capital approval
• campaign launch authority
• live ad execution
• creative production
• override authority over Velocity
• financial approval decisions
Those remain governed by Affiliate Brain Canon, Affiliate Brain Architecture, the Velocity Decision Engine, and related operational protocols.
Definition / Rules
Architectural Role
The Offer Scoring Model sits between Offer Intelligence and Velocity.
It converts qualitative intelligence into a mechanical scoring framework.
This improves consistency when comparing multiple affiliate opportunities.
Position in Affiliate Brain Flow
Offer Discovery
↓
Offer Intelligence Page
↓
Offer Scoring Model
↓
Market Context
↓
Tracking Governance
↓
Research Intelligence
↓
Authority and Narrative Intelligence
↓
Structural Signal Audit
↓
Intent Declaration
↓
Velocity Decision Engine
Core Principle
Not all offers deserve testing.
Offers must be evaluated using consistent structural criteria.
The scoring model does not decide whether an offer wins.
It indicates whether an offer appears strong enough to justify deeper progression.
Scoring Categories
Each offer is scored across the following categories.
Maximum total score:
100 points
1. Mechanism Strength
Score range:
0-20
Evaluate:
• uniqueness of mechanism
• curiosity strength
• explanatory power
• perceived novelty
High score characteristics:
• mechanism feels new
• mechanism sparks curiosity
• mechanism is easy to communicate
• mechanism differentiates the offer
Low score characteristics:
• mechanism is generic
• mechanism lacks intrigue
• mechanism is difficult to explain
2. Hook Potential
Score range:
0-20
Evaluate:
• ability to create strong ad hooks
• emotional trigger strength
• curiosity generation
• storytelling potential
High score characteristics:
• multiple obvious ad hooks
• strong emotional trigger
• easy to create contrarian angles
• clear mechanism-led curiosity
Low score characteristics:
• weak hook angles
• bland messaging
• poor stopping power
3. Problem Intensity
Score range:
0-15
Evaluate:
• urgency of the problem solved
• emotional pain level
• willingness to act
High score characteristics:
• painful, urgent problem
• audience strongly wants relief
• clear desired outcome
Low score characteristics:
• mild problem
• low urgency
• curiosity only
4. Market Demand
Score range:
0-15
Evaluate:
• audience size
• search demand
• visible market activity
• community interest
High score characteristics:
• large active market
• clear visible demand
• established audience awareness
Low score characteristics:
• weak demand
• unclear audience size
• limited market activity
5. Funnel Quality
Score range:
0-10
Evaluate:
• funnel structure quality
• VSL strength
• bridge page strength
• perceived trust and clarity
High score characteristics:
• strong opening
• clear value proposition
• smooth path to action
• persuasive narrative
Low score characteristics:
• weak opening
• confusing flow
• poor trust signals
• unclear CTA path
6. Promotability
Score range:
0-10
Evaluate:
• ease of promoting the offer
• angle flexibility
• content compatibility
• ad suitability
High score characteristics:
• multiple traffic strategies possible
• strong ad adaptability
• easy to create creatives around
Low score characteristics:
• hard to explain
• weak ad adaptability
• limited angle flexibility
7. Compliance Safety
Score range:
0-10
Evaluate:
• platform compliance risk
• claim sensitivity
• account safety profile
High score characteristics:
• low claim risk
• easy to advertise safely
• minimal compliance exposure
Low score characteristics:
• medical or income claims
• high policy risk
• likely moderation issues
Total Score Formula
Maximum total score:
100 points
Formula:
Mechanism Strength
- Hook Potential
- Problem Intensity
- Market Demand
- Funnel Quality
- Promotability
- Compliance Safety
= Total Offer Score
Score Interpretation
90-100
Exceptional structural opportunity
80-89
Strong opportunity worthy of serious consideration
70-79
Moderate opportunity requiring caution and validation
60-69
Weak opportunity, test only with strong supporting reasons
Below 60
Poor opportunity, avoid unless a strategic reason exists
Scoring Rules
Scores must be based on actual offer intelligence.
Scores must not be inflated to justify desired testing.
Scoring should reflect structural reality, not emotional excitement.
Required Output Format
Each scored offer should record:
Mechanism Strength:
X / 20
Hook Potential:
X / 20
Problem Intensity:
X / 15
Market Demand:
X / 15
Funnel Quality:
X / 10
Promotability:
X / 10
Compliance Safety:
X / 10
Total Offer Score:
X / 100
Example Output
Mechanism Strength:
16 / 20
Hook Potential:
17 / 20
Problem Intensity:
13 / 15
Market Demand:
12 / 15
Funnel Quality:
7 / 10
Promotability:
8 / 10
Compliance Safety:
6 / 10
Total Offer Score:
79 / 100
Interpretation:
Moderate opportunity requiring caution and validation
Drift Protection
The system must prevent:
• inflated scoring
• emotional scoring
• scoring without supporting intelligence
• using score as the sole capital decision mechanism
Scoring informs Velocity.
It does not replace Velocity.
Architectural Intent
The Offer Scoring Model improves opportunity selection discipline.
It allows Affiliate Brain to compare offers using a consistent mechanical framework.
This reduces impulsive testing and protects capital.
Change Log
Version: v1.1
Date: 2026-03-14
Author: MWMS HeadOffice / Affiliate Brain
Change: Rebuilt page to align with MWMS document standards. Added standardised document header, replaced Linked Canon and Last Updated with compliant metadata, introduced Purpose / Scope / Definition / Rules structure, normalised section formatting, and preserved the original offer scoring logic and 100-point framework.
Version: v1.0
Date: 2026-03-07
Author: Affiliate Brain
Change: Initial creation of Offer Scoring Model. Defined scoring categories including mechanism strength, hook potential, problem intensity, market demand, funnel quality, promotability, and compliance safety. Established 100-point structural scoring framework.
END – AFFILIATE BRAIN – OFFER SCORING MODEL v1.1