Will ServiceNow disclose a specific Now Assist Pro Plus install-base attach rate (as a percentage of eligible customers or seats) at or before the Q4 2026 earnings call?

Two opposing forces. (1) The granular-disclosure trend at NOW is real — qualitative → directional → dollar → NNB share. The next step is install-base attach percentage. With FAD on May 4 as a natural new-metric introduction venue, plus 4 earnings calls and multiple 10-Qs in the window, the disclosure surface area is broad. Bear narrative pressure (Keith Weiss) creates explicit incentive to surface auditable metrics. (2) NOW's historical SKU-level disclosure conservatism is structural — the company has avoided giving competitors (Microsoft Dynamics 365 Copilot) usable signal. Methodology issues with 'eligible install base' definition argue for aggregate over specific. I assign 40% — modal NO but with meaningful YES probability given multi-venue surface area.

I lean more bearish on disclosure. The question's strict resolution criteria require a SPECIFIC point-in-time percentage. Management's incremental granularity has been about narrative coverage — they cite '50% NNB non-seat-based' as the headline, not '32% of install base.' These metrics serve different purposes: NNB share is a pipeline/momentum metric, attach rate is a penetration metric. Mastantuono is unlikely to introduce a penetration KPI without multi-quarter readiness, and that requires advance internal alignment we don't have evidence of. The May 4 FAD is more likely to focus on (a) consumption-pricing economics, (b) AI revenue trajectory, (c) margin inflection — than introducing a SKU-attach metric. I peg at 32%.

Most bullish. Three reasons. (1) The bear narrative pressure (Keith Weiss / 14% selloff) is a category-1 event that often triggers management to introduce new metrics specifically to refute the critique. McDermott's narrative orientation is to over-disclose when under pressure. (2) The May 4 FAD is the textbook venue for new KPI introduction — investor days are when companies announce new metric frameworks. (3) The 9-month resolution window covers FAD + Q2 + Q3 + Q4 calls + multiple 10-Qs and any analyst-day events. The OR-conditions are inclusive. Even one slide in the FAD deck that gives a specific number would resolve YES. The probability that management introduces ANY specific number across that venue list is elevated. I peg at 48%.

Base rate ~30-40% for new SKU-attach disclosure at large-cap SaaS within 9 months under narrative pressure. NOW conservative disclosure culture (-5pp) offset by bear narrative pressure (+5pp) and broad venue surface area (+5pp) and granularity trend (+5pp). Net: 38%.

Slightly below 40 due to NOW's structural SKU-level reticence. The metric is commercially sensitive (Microsoft Copilot threat in 2-3 yrs). Even with FAD venue and bear pressure, management may use aggregate metrics that satisfy narrative without giving competitors usable signal. 35%.

40% — the inclusiveness of the resolution structure (any single specific percentage in any venue across 9 months) is meaningful. Even one off-script CEO comment, one FAD slide, one supplemental table satisfies YES. The probability of zero such moments across that surface area is meaningfully less than 1.

Granularity trend supports disclosure. FAD venue. Bear pressure. NOW conservatism cuts other direction. 38%.

Bearish: NOW SKU disclosure rare; competitive sensitivity high. 32%.

Bullish: multi-venue + 9-month + bear pressure incentive = 42%.