I built a free Stripe failed payment audit but almost nobody will connect their account!
I’ve been building Recoup.. a free tool that checks the last 90 days of a Stripe account and shows:
How much revenue was lost to failed payments
How many payments failed
An estimated recoverable amount
Which failed payments may be worth addressing first
The product works, but my first 30 days exposed a much harder problem.
I received 148 visitors.
Six Stripe connections were completed and five reports were generated..but all of those reports came from the same Stripe account I used for testing.
So despite having a functioning product, I still have essentially zero validation from strangers.
The current flow asks people to connect Stripe using read only OAuth. The tool cannot charge customers, issue refunds, or change anything in their account.
But I understand the hesitation: connecting financial software to an unfamiliar product is a significant trust request.
I’m trying to determine what would make this genuinely useful and trustworthy to another SaaS founder.
Would you be more likely to try it if:
- You could estimate the loss without connecting Stripe first?
- You could upload an exported Stripe CSV instead?
- The site showed a sample report before asking you to connect?
- Something else would need to change?
I’m not looking for generic launch feedback. I’m specifically trying to understand what would make a Stripe user comfortable enough to run the audit.
Here’s the tool: https://recoup.llc
I’d appreciate blunt feedback. TY in advance.
Strong yes to your first option — "estimate without connecting first." I built something adjacent (a free SaaS health/revenue-at-risk tool) and went all-in on zero-connection: pure manual number entry (MRR, active customers, refund/churn rate), runs entirely client-side, nothing sent to a server. Zero signup, zero OAuth. Traffic is still low so I can't claim a huge sample size, but anecdotally the "nothing leaves your browser" framing removes the trust objection entirely — people will type in rough numbers they'd never authorize an OAuth read-scope for.
For Recoup specifically, I'd bet a CSV upload (or even just 3-4 manual inputs: total failed payment count, average failed amount, days since last failure) gets you dramatically more completions than OAuth, even if the output is directionally-estimated rather than exact. You can always offer the real Stripe connection as the "get the precise number" upgrade path once they've seen a rough estimate and are hooked.
Connecting Stripe is a high-trust request before the user has experienced value. A sample-data mode, redacted CSV upload, or screenshot-based preview could demonstrate the recovery opportunity first, then earn the account connection.
The hesitation around connecting Stripe is completely understandable. It’s not just about the technical security, but also the mental burden of that initial trust leap. For me, seeing a really strong sample report would be huge. Not just a static image, but maybe an interactive demo where I could input a few hypothetical numbers and see exactly how the report would break down for my business. That way, I can clearly visualize the insights and the potential recoverable amount before I even think about connecting my actual account. It significantly reduces the unknown and makes the value proposition tangible from the start.
I’d separate “is the audit useful?” from “do I trust this app with Stripe?” Right now the first real proof of value is behind the highest-friction step, so a visitor has to grant access before they know whether the report is worth anything.
A trust ladder might work better:
Then instrument those as separate funnel events: sample viewed -> estimate completed -> CSV/OAuth selected -> connection completed -> report viewed. With 148 visitors, “6 connections” alone doesn’t tell you whether the bottleneck is perceived value, Stripe trust, or the OAuth screen itself.
I’d probably test the sample report + manual estimate before building CSV import. If strangers complete the estimate but still refuse OAuth, you have strong evidence it’s a trust/permission problem rather than a weak value proposition.
Shipped the first thing you suggested... sample report is live recoup.llc/sample-report. Curious if this changes whether you'd try it.
Just saw this — yes, the sample changes it. Cold, I’d click the sample first because it costs zero effort and lets me judge whether the output is useful before I give up any data.
I checked the live sample. It does the trust job much better now. The next thing I’d test is not sample → Stripe immediately, though. I’d make “Estimate mine without connecting” the primary CTA after the sample, with “Connect Stripe for exact numbers” as the higher-accuracy path.
One small credibility detail: the “~65%” recovery claim is doing a lot of work, so I’d either source it or qualify it. Otherwise this is a much stronger flow than before.
This is exactly the diagnosis I needed Ty for taking the time. You're right that the first real proof of value is buried behind the highest friction step which is backwards.
I'm going to build the trust ladder in the order you laid out.. sample report first, then a zero connection estimate from a few manual inputs with read only OAuth as the fast path for people ready for it. And I'll put the exact permissions ("read-only, no charges, no refunds, revoke anytime") right next to the button instead of making people guess.
One question before I build....if you landed on the page cold which would you actually click first ? a sample report, or the manual estimate? Trying to figure out which one to ship first. Ty in advance..Greg