Skip to main content
Card class: Hero • Category: Project Management

​
At a glance

Of the finding-pages Vortex IQ created in your Confluence Findings Space in the last 90 days, the percentage that you’ve moved to a closed vortexiq.status. The single number for “is the team keeping up with what we surface?”
The formulaclosed_in_window ÷ created_in_window × 100, where the window is the last 90 days based on Confluence’s page createdAt timestamp. A finding-page created on day -91 is not in the denominator even if it was closed yesterday.
What “closed” meansThe page’s vortexiq.status page-property is in {done, wont_fix, duplicate} at the time of read. The page may have moved through open → investigating → in_progress → done, or jumped directly to wont_fix. Both count.
Why “wont_fix” counts as closedBecause the team made a decision. The opposite (a page sitting open forever) is the failure mode this card detects. We measure decision-throughput, not just shipped fixes.
Why 90 daysLong enough to smooth fortnightly noise, short enough to react to recent changes. Window fixed at the manifest level.
Confluence Space scopeMapped Findings Space only. Other Spaces never contribute.
Atlassian-suite parityIf you also run Jira with Confluence-primary routing, con_vortexiq_finding_resolution_rate and jir_vortexiq_finding_resolution_rate should agree to within 1, 2 percentage points (the small drift is from sync timing on linked-issue updates).
Time window90D (rolling).
Alert trigger<50%, fewer than half of new findings closed within window.
Sentiment key{'type': 'gauge', 'thresholds': {'good': 75, 'warn': 50}}. Above 75% green, 50, 75% amber, below 50% red.
Rolesowner, operations

​
Calculation

Calculated automatically from your Confluence data. See the At a glance summary above for what the metric tracks and the worked example below for a typical reading.

​
Worked example

Same US enterprise retailer. Confluence VFND Space, 90-day window ending 24 Feb 26. 
Window start:    27 Nov 25 (90 days back from 24 Feb 26)
Pages created in window:              71
Of those, currently closed:           53
Of those, still open:                 18

Finding Resolution Rate (90d) = 53 ÷ 71 = 74.65%
The card shows 75%, just on the edge of the green zone (good ≥ 75). Reading: “the team is closing 3 in 4 findings within 90 days, healthy”. The dashboard banner reads “Resolution rate 75%, stable vs last week”. The breakdown of the 53 closed:
vortexiq.status valuePagesCounts toward this card?
done (work shipped)38yes
wont_fix (decision)11yes
duplicate (deduplicated)4yes
All 53 count, the card measures decision-throughput, not just shipped fixes. The 11 “wont_fix” represent healthy decisions, often “this finding doesn’t apply to our subscription model” or “marked stale per audit team’s review”. Compared to the merchant’s Jira card: jir_vortexiq_finding_resolution_rate for the same period reads 74%, drift of 1 percentage point. The drift is one Jira issue still in In Review whose linked Confluence page has already been updated to done, the two-way sync is mid-flight. Within the next reconciliation cycle the two cards converge.

​
Sibling cards merchants should reference together

Resolution Rate is the throughput indicator. Always read with:
CardWhy it matters next to Resolution RateWhat the combination tells you
VortexIQ Findings OpenCurrent queue depth.High Open + low Resolution = team is genuinely behind. Low Open + low Resolution = inflow low; rate calculated on a small sample, ignore for a sprint.
Abandoned Findings (>14d no movement)Composition of resolution.Resolution 70% + Abandoned high = team picks the easy ones, leaves the hard ones to rot. The composition matters.
Avg Time-to-FixPer-finding speed.High rate + low Time-to-Fix = excellent. High rate + high Time-to-Fix = “we close them but only after 30 days each”.
Sprint Velocity (avg)Team’s overall throughput across all work.If Sprint Velocity is fine but Resolution Rate is low, findings are deprioritised. Conversation: are they being deprioritised correctly?
Tickets by AssigneeWho closes what.If 80% of resolutions come from one assignee, you have a key-person dependency.

​
Reconciling against the vendor’s own dashboard

Where to reproduce this in Confluence itself: The page-properties report at the top of the Findings Space gives you a live table of every finding-page with its status. To compute the rate by hand:
  1. Denominator: count rows where Created is on or after today − 90 days. Use the Created column filter.
  2. Numerator: of those rows, count where vortexiq.status is in {done, wont_fix, duplicate}.
Divide. The percentage should match this card to the nearest 1%. If the page-properties macro is missing, fall back to a CQL search: 
space = VFND
  AND label = "vortexiq-finding"
  AND created >= now("-90d")
Then post-filter by status (CQL can’t query page-property values directly). Why our number may legitimately differ from your hand calculation:
ReasonDirectionWhy
Sync lagEither60-second sync window means status changes in the last minute may not be reflected. Doesn’t typically move the percentage by more than 1, 2 points.
RoundingEitherWe round to the nearest whole percent; your hand-calc might keep two decimals. 74.65% → 75%.
Time-zone boundaryEdge casesWe compute “90 days ago” in UTC. A page created 02:00 GMT on day -90 is in our window for a UK merchant; a California-based merchant computing in UTC-8 might exclude it.
Permission scopeYours possibly lowerIf your view of the Findings Space is restricted (some pages hidden by page restrictions), your hand-count of the denominator will be lower than the connector’s view. The connector token typically has Space-admin and so sees everything.
Cross-connector reconciliation. Confluence vs Jira (Atlassian-suite): In Atlassian-suite-merchants with both connectors enabled and Confluence-primary routing, con_vortexiq_finding_resolution_rate and jir_vortexiq_finding_resolution_rate should agree to within 1, 2 percentage points. The small drift comes from sync timing (linked-issue updates lag the page-property updates by seconds). Larger gaps (>5 points) usually mean: someone closed a Confluence page-property without the linked Jira issue moving, or vice versa. Vortex IQ’s two-way sync corrects this within 15 minutes. Cross-connector reconciliation. Confluence vs other PM connectors (Notion, ClickUp, Linear, etc): The Resolution Rate definition is identical across all PM connectors (closed_in_window ÷ created_in_window × 100, rolling 90D). Comparing percentages across connectors is meaningful, but switching destinations resets the population. If you previously wrote findings to Notion and switched to Confluence last month, the Confluence 90D denominator has 30 days of inflow, not 90. Wait for the full 90 days before reading the percentage as stable.

​
Known limitations / merchant FAQs

What’s a “good” Resolution Rate? Above 75% (green) is healthy. 50, 75% (amber) means the team is keeping up but slipping. Below 50% (red) means findings accumulate faster than they’re closed and the queue keeps growing. Note: 100% is not the goal, that usually indicates the team is closing things they shouldn’t (e.g. real findings marked wont_fix to make the number look good). Why does the number drop after a quiet week? Because the denominator is a rolling 90-day window. If the team takes a week off and stops moving page-properties to closed, the resolved count falls but the created count keeps shape. The rate drops mechanically. It will recover. This is honest, not buggy. Should wont_fix count as a resolution? Yes. Deciding NOT to fix is a valid resolution; the failure mode is sitting open with no decision (see Abandoned Findings). That said, if your wont_fix rate is high (>30% of resolutions), that’s worth investigating, the audit rules may be poorly tuned for your business. Adjust in Settings → Audits. My team uses a custom status “Validated, awaiting deploy”. Should it be open or closed? If “Validated” means the planning work is finished and the deploy is purely operational, treat it as closed (vortexiq.status = done). If validation is genuinely a check-step that could bounce back, leave it in_progress. Map intent, not workflow stage. Is the rate a trend or a snapshot? Snapshot, calculated on every read. The card shows today’s percentage; for the trend, look at Throughput Trend (same data shaped as a sparkline). Vortex IQ stores daily snapshots and Ask Viq can answer “how did Resolution Rate move over Q1?” in plain English. What’s the right action when the gauge goes red? Three honest moves:
  1. Triage, run a fortnightly triage on the Findings Space. Bulk-close wont_fix on findings that aren’t relevant. Lifts the rate and forces useful conversations.
  2. Cap inflow, in Settings → Audits, disable the lowest-priority audit modules. Stops the queue growing while you work down what’s there.
  3. Add capacity, only if (1) and (2) don’t fix it.
The card resets to “no data” sometimes, why? Likely zero pages created in the 90-day window (e.g. just connected the Space yesterday, or paused all audits). Wait until findings start accumulating, the percentage is meaningless on a sample of 1, 2. My team is small (2 people), the rate swings 30 points week-to-week. Is this card useful? For very small teams, treat the trend as the signal, not the daily number. Two people closing 1 vs 0 finding-pages in a week shifts the percentage 50 points. Use Throughput Trend alongside this card and look for the 4-week moving average. We use Atlassian Cloud’s “Confluence-only” plan (no Jira). Does this still work? Yes, the Confluence connector works standalone. You lose the Jira-linked workflow tracking but the page-properties scheme handles everything we need: status, priority, assignee. Some teams genuinely prefer the wiki-only setup, the rich-evidence pages are easier to revisit 6 months later than a Jira issue. Why is this a Hero card? It’s the single highest-information number for “is the team keeping up with what we surface?”. Open tells you depth; Abandoned tells you rot. Resolution Rate tells you whether the system is healthy. CXOs ask for one number, this is it.

​
Tracked live in Vortex IQ Nerve Centre

Finding Resolution Rate (90d) is one of hundreds of KPI pulses Vortex IQ tracks across Confluence and 70+ other ecommerce connectors. Nerve Centre runs the detection layer; Vortex Mind investigates the cause when something moves; Ask Viq lets you interrogate any number in plain English. Start for free or book a demo to see this metric running on your own data.