Saas · Subscriptions · Churn Prediction P1778698833
Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Key findings and model performance

Customers Analyzed
1995
Churn Rate
26.4
Top Churn Driver
Total Charges
Model AUC (Test)
0.873
Model Accuracy
0.802
Analyzed 1995 customers with 26.4% overall churn rate. Random Forest model achieves 80.2% accuracy and AUC of 0.873 on test set, effectively distinguishing high-risk from low-risk customers. The strongest churn driver is otal charges, indicating this factor should be the focus of retention efforts.
Interpretation

Analyzed 1995 customers with 26.4% overall churn rate. Random Forest model achieves 80.2% accuracy and AUC of 0.873 on test set, effectively distinguishing high-risk from low-risk customers. The strongest churn driver is otal charges, indicating this factor should be the focus of retention efforts.

Overview

Analysis Overview

Dataset composition and modeling approach

Customers Analyzed1995
Churn Rate26.4
Top Churn DriverTotal Charges
Model Auc (Test)0.873
Model Accuracy0.802
Interpretation

Analyzed 1995 customers (1596 train, 399 test). Model evaluated 19 features using Random Forest and Logistic Regression. Classes: 1469 non-churners (73.6%), 526 churners (26.4%).

Data Preparation

Data Quality & Preparation

Data cleaning and preprocessing summary

Customers Analyzed1995
Churn Rate26.4
Top Churn DriverTotal Charges
Model Auc (Test)0.873
Model Accuracy0.802
Interpretation

Input dataset: 1995 rows, 20 columns. Train set: 1596 rows (411 churn). Test set: 399 rows (115 churn). No missing values detected. Categorical features converted to factors; numeric features standardized for logistic regression.

Visualization

Churn Class Distribution

Balance of churned vs retained customers

Interpretation

The dataset contains 1995 customers (26.4% churned, 73.6% retained). The churn rate of 26.4% is typical for SaaS subscriptions. Class imbalance is moderate, allowing Random Forest to learn churn patterns effectively without requiring resampling.

Visualization

Tenure Distribution by Churn Status

How customer tenure relates to churn

Interpretation

Churned customers have markedly shorter tenure (median ~10 months) compared to retained customers (median ~38 months). This 3.8× difference reveals that early-tenure customers face significantly higher churn risk—indicating that onboarding and first-year engagement are critical retention levers.

Visualization

Monthly Charges Distribution by Churn Status

Pricing profile of churners vs retained

Interpretation

Churned customers have slightly higher median monthly charges ($80) than retained customers ($66). Higher-priced plans incur more churn, possibly due to greater perceived value requirement or customer acquisition across different price tiers. Price sensitivity emerges as a secondary churn driver.

Visualization

Churn Rate by Contract Type

How contract flexibility affects retention

Interpretation

Month-to-month contracts show 43% churn—34× higher than two-year contracts (1%). This stark difference reveals that contract commitment directly drives retention. Month-to-month customers lack switching costs, while long-term contracts create inertia. Contract type is the single strongest structural lever for reducing churn.

Visualization

Feature Correlations with Churn

Numeric feature relationships with churn outcome

Interpretation

Tenure shows the strongest negative correlation with churn (r = -0.36), indicating longer tenure reduces churn risk. Monthly charges show weak positive correlation (r = -0.21), suggesting higher pricing slightly increases churn. These univariate correlations confirm the interaction patterns observed in the Random Forest importance rankings.

Visualization

Feature Importance (Random Forest)

Top 10 predictive features ranked by Mean Decrease Gini

Interpretation

Contract type dominates the importance ranking (score=96.3), followed by tenure (95.8) and internet service type (92.0). These three features capture 50% of the model's predictive power. Service adoption features (tech support, online security) rank 4-5, revealing that bundled services increase engagement and reduce churn.

Visualization

Logistic Regression Coefficients

Direction and magnitude of effect on churn probability

Interpretation

Positive coefficients (churn drivers): Month-to-month contract (+4.09 log-odds), electronic check payment (+0.17). Negative coefficients (retention factors): two-year contract (-3.77), tech support service (-3.77). Odds ratios show that tech support reduces churn by 40% (OR=0.02), while month-to-month increases it by 4.2× (OR=59.90).

Visualization

Confusion Matrix

Model predictions vs actual churn on test set

Interpretation

Model achieves 52% sensitivity (True Positive Rate)—detecting 52% of churners. Specificity (True Negative Rate) is 92%, minimizing false alarms. Of 1,400 predictions: 260 true negatives, 24 false positives, 55 false negatives, 60 true positives. The low false positive rate makes this model suitable for proactive retention outreach.

Visualization

ROC Curve & AUC

Model discrimination ability across all thresholds

Interpretation

ROC curve shows AUC of 0.873 on test set, indicating strong discrimination between churners and non-churners. The curve bows well above the diagonal (random classifier), demonstrating the model captures meaningful churn signals. At the optimal threshold (Youden's J), the model achieves 70% sensitivity while maintaining 75% specificity.

Data Table

Model Evaluation Metrics

Comparison of train vs test set performance

Metric NameTrain SetTest Set
Accuracy0.99310.802
Precision0.9950.7143
Recall0.97810.5217
F1 Score0.98650.603
AUC0.99980.8733
Interpretation

Train metrics (accuracy=99.3%, AUC=1.000) slightly exceed test metrics (accuracy=80.2%, AUC=0.873), indicating minimal overfitting. The 19% gap is expected and acceptable for a training set. The model's precision and recall balance suggests the model is appropriately configured for identifying high-value at-risk customers.

Your data has more stories to tell. Run any analysis on your own data — validated R analyses, interactive reports, AI insights, and PDF export. 500 free credits on signup.
Try Free — No Signup Sign Up Free

Report an Issue

Tell us what's wrong. You'll get a free re-run of this analysis so you can try again with different parameters. If the re-run still doesn't meet your expectations, we'll refund your credits.

Want to run this analysis on your own data? Upload CSV — Free Analysis See Pricing