At a glance
The percentage of VortexIQ findings created in the last 90 days whose Trello cards have been moved to a “Done” list or archived. The team’s batting average against the audit programme. Below 50% the team is falling behind; above 75% the team is matching or beating intake.
| The formula | resolved_in_window ÷ created_in_window, where resolved_in_window counts cards with vortexiq_finding_id whose state went to closed = true OR idList ∈ done_lists within the last 90 days, and created_in_window counts cards created with vortexiq_finding_id in the same window. Bucketed by vortexiq_finding_id to avoid double-counting re-creates. |
| API endpoints | GET /1/boards/{id}/cards?filter=all&fields=name,closed,idList,dateLastActivity plus GET /1/boards/{id}/actions?filter=createCard,updateCard:idList,updateCard:closed&since={now-90d} to identify the resolution events. |
| Window | Rolling 90 days, refreshed hourly. Real-time refreshes happen on every webhook event for the live count, but the rate calculation is hourly to smooth single-card volatility. |
| What “resolved” means | Either: (a) closed = true (archived), or (b) the card’s idList is in the configured “done” list set. Both are treated as resolutions. |
| Won’t-Do treatment | Counted as resolved. Trello’s “Won’t Do” is usually a list (e.g. “Won’t Do” or “Wontfix”); add it to the done-list set in connector setup so we count it correctly. |
| Board / workspace scope | All vortex_iq_outbound boards across all connected workspaces. |
| Archived boards | Excluded from numerator and denominator. |
| Time zone | UTC for both the create and resolve timestamps. |
| Alert trigger | < 50% raises a critical alert. The 50% threshold matches the other PM connectors’ calibration. |
| Sentiment thresholds | Gauge: green ≥ 75%, amber 50-74%, red < 50%. |
| Multi-workspace aggregation | Yes; per-workspace stack panel available. |
| Roles | owner, operations |
Calculation
Calculated automatically from your Trello (API) data. See the At a glance summary above for what the metric tracks and the worked example below for a typical reading.Worked example
A 6-person UK gift-shop DTC brand on Shopify, Trello as primary planner. Snapshot taken on 02 May 26 at 12:00 BST.| Last 90 days (02 Feb 26 - 02 May 26) | Count |
|---|---|
Findings created (cards with vortexiq_finding_id, created_at in window) | 47 |
| Findings resolved (above set, AND moved to a Done list OR archived in window) | 28 |
| Findings still open from window | 17 |
| Findings re-created during window | 2 (counted once in numerator) |
- 60% sits in the amber band (50-74%). A small Trello-led team running at 60% is acceptable. Trello’s lighter-weight workflow tends to produce slightly lower rates than Asana or Linear because the absence of formal sprint commitments means fewer findings get planned in.
- The team will not collapse the open queue at this rate. At 60%, expect 15-20 findings open at steady state; anything above that means the audit programme is finding more than the team can absorb.
- Pair this card with Avg Time-to-Fix. A 60% rate with a 5-day mean time-to-fix is healthy for a small team. A 60% rate with a 25-day mean time-to-fix means the team is closing easy items quickly and stalling on the rest.
- Run the weekly grooming standup. Trello rates respond best to recurring board grooming rather than headcount changes. A 15-minute Monday session that walks each board and either commits or archives stale cards typically lifts the rate by 5-10 points within a month.
- Aim for 70% sustained. Above 75% on a Trello-led team is rare and usually only achievable with strict list-discipline (e.g. WIP limits via the List Limits Power-Up). Most healthy small Trello teams live at 60-72%.
Sibling cards merchants should reference together
| Card | Why pair it with Resolution Rate | What the combination tells you |
|---|---|---|
| VortexIQ Findings Open | The denominator’s other half. | Falling rate + climbing open count = capacity bottleneck. |
| Abandoned Findings (>14d) | Tasks that count as denominator but never become numerator. | High abandoned + low rate = execution discipline gap. |
| Avg Time-to-Fix (days) | The cycle time inside this rate. | High rate + low time-to-fix = excellent; high rate + high time-to-fix = closing eventually but slowly. |
| Tickets Resolved (7d) | Short-window throughput across all cards. | High overall throughput + low findings rate = audit work being deprioritised. |
| Sprint Velocity (avg) | Trello’s “sprints” are typically weekly cycles; velocity is the team’s capacity ceiling. | Flat rate + rising velocity = audit work isn’t reaching weekly cycles. |
| Throughput Trend | Pace direction. | Rate dipping while throughput climbs = deliberate prioritisation away from audit work. |
| Sprint Progress | Whether findings get committed in a given week. | Low sprint progress + low rate = findings queued but never pulled in. |
Reconciling against the vendor’s own dashboard
Where to look in Trello’s own UI:trello.com/b/{boardId} then the Butler menu (Trello’s automation feature, available on Standard and above) can produce simple completion-rate reports per board. The Card Counter Power-Up shows per-list totals that you can use to compute resolution-rate manually. There is no native single-number rate report; this card is the closest a merchant gets without a Power-Up like Hello Reports or Corrello (Atlassian-recommended Power-Ups for Trello board reporting).Why our number may legitimately differ from a manually-computed Trello rate:
| Reason | Direction | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Window definition | Either | Our rolling 90-day window aligns to UTC; manual computation usually uses calendar months in the viewer’s timezone. |
| Done-list mapping | Either | If your “Done” list mapping in connector setup is incomplete (missing a “Released” or “Won’t Do” list), our resolved count is lower than reality. |
| Re-created findings | Ours lower | If a finding card was archived, re-created, then resolved, manual counts double-count; we count once per vortexiq_finding_id. |
| Cross-workspace aggregation | Ours wider | We sum across workspaces. |
| Custom-field detection | Ours lower | Cards without vortexiq_finding_id (description-marker fallback failed) drop out of both numerator and denominator, slightly biasing the rate downward. |
| Card | Expected relationship | What causes the divergence |
|---|---|---|
datadog.dd_health_score | Independent. Datadog Health is server-side production health; Trello rate is internal team operations. | High Datadog Health + low Trello rate = production fine but the team is falling behind on prevention work. The lag from low rate to user-visible regression is typically 4-8 weeks on a Trello-led team (longer than Asana/Linear because Trello workflows are less structured). |
newrelic.nr_apdex | Same shape. | Same lag. |
Known limitations / merchant FAQs
My Card Counter Power-Up sums say 71% resolved but you say 60%. Why? The 11-point gap is normal. Likely causes in order: (1) Done-list mapping drift, a list you treat as Done in your head is not in the connector setup; (2) Re-created findings (we count once per finding-id, manual sums double-count); (3) Cross-workspace aggregation. Open the per-workspace stack panel; the gap usually closes to within 3 points. Does archiving a card count as resolved? Yes. From the audit programme’s perspective, archiving signals “we are done with this”, regardless of whether the underlying work shipped or was abandoned. If your team archives cards as a way to clear the board without resolving the underlying issue, this card will show artificially high; the abandoned-findings card and the open-findings card will both look healthy too. The leading indicator that this is happening is a divergence between resolution rate and actual production-side improvement (e.g. Datadog Health). The fix is team discipline, not a metric change. Our rate sits at 45%. Should I be concerned? Yes. Below 50% is the alarm threshold for a reason, the open queue compounds week-over-week and abandonment climbs in the following weeks. The standard playbook on Trello: open this card, Findings Open, Abandoned Findings, Tickets by Assignee side-by-side. On Trello specifically, the most common cause is a “no weekly grooming” pattern: cards pile in the Backlog list and nothing forces prioritisation. Add a 15-minute Monday standup that walks each board. We use multiple Trello workspaces. Which workspace’s rate matters most? The lowest one, because it tells you where execution discipline is weakest. Open the per-workspace stack panel in the connector drawer. Long-lived “operations” or “miscellaneous” boards typically sit at the bottom; active project boards at the top. Card velocity dropped this week, rate is still high. What’s happening? The “team closed everything easy and left the hard stuff” pattern. Open Avg Time-to-Fix, if mean cycle time climbed alongside the velocity drop, the team has finished the quick-wins and is now starting the heavier findings. Healthy phase, lasts 1-3 weeks; rate dips during it then recovers. Today’s rate looks volatile. At low resolution volumes the rate is noisy: 5 of 8 is 62.5%, one extra close moves it to 75%. The 90-day window dampens this but small Trello boards still see daily wobble. The 7-day moving rate (trend line beneath the headline) is steadier. Multi-team reporting on a single Trello workspace? Trello does not have ateam primitive at the API level. The pattern is one board per team, with each board tagged separately as vortex_iq_outbound. The per-board stack panel then surfaces per-team breakdown. Multi-team Trello users with a single shared board will not get a clean per-team rate.
Is Trello the right tool for tracking this metric?
Trello fits small teams (1-15) who value zero-friction onboarding. For this metric specifically, Trello produces the noisiest rate of the six PM tools because the absence of native sprint and status primitives means the rate depends heavily on team discipline (done-list naming, archive habits). If you find yourself frequently arguing with the rate’s accuracy, the underlying tell is that Trello’s flexibility has become a bug for your team’s size; the fix is to tighten board structure (WIP limits, mandatory done-list, weekly grooming) or graduate to Asana / Linear. Most healthy small teams stay on Trello at 60-72% and that is fine.
Rate climbed but the team didn’t change anything. What happened?
Three usual causes: (1) Audit programme produced fewer findings (denominator shrank, rate climbed). Check Findings Open trend. (2) Bulk archive of stale cards in a board cleanup (e.g. an end-of-quarter “archive everything in Backlog older than 60 days” sweep). Check Trello board audit logs (Workspace settings → Audit logs, Premium/Enterprise only). (3) A board was archived: all open cards on it dropped from the denominator while their resolved siblings stayed. Lift of 5-10 points overnight is possible.