Skip to content
Back to skills

Weighted Scoring Matrix

ASecurity

Multi-factor decisions become arbitrary without explicit weights:

  • 4 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 3, 2026
ai-agentsjavascriptjavasecurityperformance

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 3, 2026

npx -y skills add fabioc-aloha/Alex_Skill_Mall --skill weighted-scoring-matrix --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Weighted Scoring Matrix?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Weighted Scoring Matrix
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/fabioc-aloha-weighted-scoring-matrix/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/fabioc-aloha-weighted-scoring-matrix)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: weighted-scoring-matrix
description: "Multi-factor decisions become arbitrary without explicit weights:"
lastReviewed: 2026-04-30
---

# Weighted Scoring Matrix

## The Problem

Multi-factor decisions become arbitrary without explicit weights:

- "We chose Option A because it felt better"
- No audit trail for why factors mattered
- Inconsistent decision-making across time

## The Solution

Explicit scoring matrix with normalized weights.

```javascript
// Define factors and weights (must sum to 1.0)
const factors = {
  performance: { weight: 0.30, description: 'Response time, throughput' },
  maintainability: { weight: 0.25, description: 'Code clarity, test coverage' },
  cost: { weight: 0.20, description: 'Infrastructure, licensing' },
  security: { weight: 0.15, description: 'Vulnerability surface' },
  userExperience: { weight: 0.10, description: 'Ease of use, learning curve' }
};

// Score each option (1-5 scale)
const options = {
  optionA: { performance: 4, maintainability: 5, cost: 3, security: 4, userExperience: 4 },
  optionB: { performance: 5, maintainability: 3, cost: 2, security: 5, userExperience: 3 },
  optionC: { performance: 3, maintainability: 4, cost: 5, security: 3, userExperience: 5 }
};

// Calculate weighted scores
function calculateScore(scores) {
  return Object.entries(factors).reduce((total, [factor, { weight }]) => {
    return total + (scores[factor] * weight);
  }, 0);
}

Object.entries(options).forEach(([name, scores]) => {
  console.log(`${name}: ${calculateScore(scores).toFixed(2)}`);
});
// optionA: 4.05, optionB: 3.70, optionC: 4.00
```

## Optional Boosts

For factors that can disqualify or strongly prefer:

```javascript
const boosts = {
  mustHave: (score) => score < 3 ? 0 : score,  // Zero if below threshold
  preferred: (score) => score >= 4 ? score * 1.1 : score  // 10% boost if high
};
```

## Output Format

| Option | Perf (0.30) | Maint (0.25) | Cost (0.20) | Sec (0.15) | UX (0.10) | **Total** |
|--------|-------------|--------------|-------------|------------|-----------|-----------|
| A | 4 (1.20) | 5 (1.25) | 3 (0.60) | 4 (0.60) | 4 (0.40) | **4.05** |
| B | 5 (1.50) | 3 (0.75) | 2 (0.40) | 5 (0.75) | 3 (0.30) | **3.70** |
| C | 3 (0.90) | 4 (1.00) | 5 (1.00) | 3 (0.45) | 5 (0.50) | **3.85** |

## Verification

1. Weights sum to 1.0
2. Scores are consistently applied (same rubric)
3. Winner matches intuition (if not, weights are wrong)

## When to Apply

- Technology selection
- Vendor evaluation
- Architecture decisions
- Hiring decisions
- Any multi-factor choice

## Tags

`architecture` `decision-making` `scoring` `evaluation`

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.