NIL markets are not linear, predictable, or fair — they are threshold-driven and highly uneven. Most players with similar on-field impact earn similar NIL amounts, while a small number break out dramatically due to position, visibility, and timing. ImpactCap is built to surface that reality — not hide it.

On-field impact matters — but it explains only a small portion of NIL outcomes. Players with nearly identical impact scores often earn wildly different NIL values, especially once visibility and market demand enter the picture. This is why NIL outcomes cluster tightly for most players and then spike for a few. Impact sets the floor. Visibility and market dynamics determine the ceiling.

Positions don't just influence NIL — they define what's even possible. Quarterbacks and wide receivers account for a disproportionate share of total NIL dollars, while other positions face structural caps regardless of performance. Comparing NIL across positions without context leads to bad decisions.

• Showing medians instead of averages
• Comparing players within position groups
• Separating expected outcomes from upside scenarios

ImpactCap normalizes for these realities so comparisons reflect the market as it actually operates.

The data shows a clear pattern: Most players live in a flat, crowded middle, while a small number of players trigger explosive NIL growth. That doesn't mean everyone is on a breakout path. It means NIL rewards market activation, not incremental improvement. Hockey-stick outcomes are rare — not typical.

High NIL spend does not guarantee high return. Many of the most efficient players — those delivering the most impact per dollar — sit far below the top of the NIL rankings. Smaller NIL investments often yield disproportionate returns, while star deals primarily reduce risk rather than maximize efficiency.

• Impact per $1M NIL
• Distance from expected value
• Under Expected vs Over Expected signals

This is why ImpactCap treats NIL like portfolio construction — not star chasing.