For early-stage AI companies, performance should be measured by the speed of iteration, shipping, and learning, not just traditional metrics like revenue. In a rapidly evolving landscape, the ability to quickly get signals from the market and adapt is the primary indicator of future success.

Vanity metrics like total revenue can be misleading. A startup might acquire many low-priced, low-usage customers without solving a core problem. Deep, consistent user engagement statistics are a much stronger indicator of genuine, 'found' demand than top-line numbers alone.

Unlike traditional B2B markets where only ~5% of customers are buying at any time, the AI boom has pushed nearly 100% of companies to seek solutions at once. This temporary gold rush warps perception of market size, creating a risk of over-investment similar to the COVID-era software bubble.

Since today's AI companies grow too fast to have multi-year renewal data, investors must adapt their diligence. The focus shifts from long-term retention to short-cycle retention and, crucially, deep product engagement. High usage is the best leading indicator of future stickiness and value.

Lin warns that much of today's AI revenue is 'experimental,' where customers test solutions without long-term commitment. He calls annualizing this pilot revenue 'a joke.' He advises founders to prioritize slower, high-quality, high-retention revenue over fast, low-quality growth that will eventually churn.

The current AI hype cycle can create misleading top-of-funnel metrics. The only companies that will survive are those demonstrating strong, above-benchmark user and revenue retention. It has become the ultimate litmus test for whether a product provides real, lasting value beyond the initial curiosity.

Unlike traditional software where PMF is a stable milestone, in the rapidly evolving AI space, it's a "treadmill." Customer expectations and technological capabilities shift weekly, forcing even nine-figure revenue companies to constantly re-validate and recapture their market fit to survive.

The narrative of "0 to $100M in a year" often reflects a startup's dependence on a larger, fast-growing customer (like an AI foundation model company) rather than intrinsic product superiority. This growth is a market anomaly, similar to COVID testing labs, and can vanish as quickly as it appeared when competition normalizes prices and demand shifts.

The conventional wisdom for SaaS companies to find their 'second act' after reaching $100M in revenue is now obsolete. The extreme rate of change in the AI space forces companies to constantly reinvent themselves and refind product-market fit on a quarterly basis to survive.