Why Your Startup Needs a Brand Name That Fails the 'Radio Test'

You're in a naming workshop. Someone suggests a name. The first response: "But can you spell it over the phone?" or "Would it work on the radio?"

This is the most common—and most damaging—filter founders apply to startup brand naming. And it's killing potentially great names.

The "radio test" comes from an era when brand discovery happened through audio advertising. It made sense then. It's actively harmful now.

The Data from 200+ Startups: Memorable Wins

Across the startups we've named and positioned—mostly YC and a16z-backed companies raising seed to Series B—there's a clear pattern. The companies with names that slightly challenge immediate comprehension consistently outperform those with obvious, descriptive names.

Look at the unicorns: Figma. Deel. Ramp. Notion. Retool. Stripe.

Not one of these passes the radio test cleanly. Figma sounds like "stigma." Deel gets spelled "Deal" constantly. Ramp is ambiguous (loading ramp? on-ramp?). Yet each name is instantly recognizable in their category.

Compare that to the graveyard of startups with perfectly clear names: CloudSync Pro, DataBridge Solutions, TeamConnect Enterprise. Easy to spell. Easy to forget. Dead on arrival.

Why Clarity Is Overrated in Startup Naming

The radio test optimizes for the wrong thing. It optimizes for transmission accuracy when you should optimize for memory formation.

When someone hears your startup's name, you don't want them to spell it correctly. You want them to:

1. Remember it exists 3 days later
2. Associate it with a specific problem space
3. Be curious enough to search for it

A slightly difficult name creates cognitive friction—and that friction aids memory. Your brain has to work a little harder to process "Figma," so it encodes more deeply than "DesignTool."

This is basic cognitive psychology. The generation effect: information you have to work to retrieve or understand is remembered better than information handed to you.

The Real Naming Framework (From 200+ Brand Sprints)

Here's what we've found actually matters in startup brand naming:

1. Distinctiveness > Clarity

Your name needs to stand out in a sea of SaaS sameness. When a founder can recall your name unprompted in a conversation about your category, you win. That recall threshold is far more important than spelling accuracy.

Test this: Say your name out loud in a sentence: "We use [name] for [category]." Does it sound like 5 other companies? You have a clarity problem, not a distinctiveness problem.

2. Searchability > Pronounceability

No one discovers B2B startups on the radio anymore. They discover you through:

• Twitter threads and founder tweets
• Investor intros and warm emails
• Product Hunt launches
• LinkedIn posts
• Search engines

In every channel, your name is written first. The reader controls the pronunciation in their head. This gives you far more latitude than traditional brand naming wisdom suggests.

What matters: when someone searches for your name—even with a typo—do they find you? We've worked with startups that chose names specifically because they owned the .com, the typo domains, and the Twitter handle. That's strategic naming.

3. Positioning Anchors > Generic Descriptors

Weak names try to describe what you do. Strong names anchor a position you want to own.

Ramp doesn't describe corporate cards. It anchors the idea of acceleration—ramping up, moving fast, scaling. That's positioning work the name does for free.

Notion doesn't describe a wiki. It anchors the idea of fluid thinking, note-taking, ideation. The name primes users for the product philosophy.

Retool literally tells you "re-tool your internal software." It's descriptive, yes, but more importantly, it positions internal tools as something that needs a fundamental rethink.

When we name startups, we're looking for words that carry the right connotations—speed, intelligence, simplicity, power—without literally describing the feature set. Because your feature set will change. Your positioning shouldn't.

The Anti-Patterns: Names That Look Safe But Kill Momentum

After 200+ naming projects, these patterns consistently underperform:

The Compound Descriptor

DataFlow, CodeStream, CloudBase, DevHub. These names say what you do but give investors and customers nothing to grab onto. They're forgettable by design.

Worse: they age poorly. When you pivot or expand, the name becomes a liability. DataFlow that does more than data flow has an identity crisis.

The .io Domain Hack

Monit.io, Analyt.io, Collabor.io. This was clever in 2015. In 2024, it signals "we couldn't afford the .com." More importantly, it often forces awkward spelling that hurts SEO and word-of-mouth.

Exception: if the .io is genuinely part of the brand identity (like Socket.io for a sockets library), it works. But don't contort a name to make a domain hack work.

The Meaningless Invented Word

Zyntara, Vexora, Quilyx. These sound like pharmaceutical companies or enterprise software from 2003. They're trying so hard to be unique that they're unmemorable.

The difference between Figma (invented, but phonetically interesting) and Zyntara (invented, generic): Figma sounds like something. It has texture. Zyntara sounds like a name generator.

When You Should Break Your Own Rules

Distinctive names work best when:

• You're targeting early adopters and tech-forward buyers (developers, designers, product teams)
• You have strong word-of-mouth channels (YC batch, Twitter, Product Hunt, communities)
• Your product is differentiated enough to support a bold name
• You're well-funded enough to build brand awareness through content and presence

If you're building for conservative enterprise buyers, in a highly regulated space, or selling into procurement teams that need safety signals—you might need more clarity. A fintech company called "Hedge" might confuse risk-averse CFOs. But even then, Ramp proved you can have both edge and enterprise traction.

One of our YC clients in the compliance space chose a slightly edgy name. Their theory: compliance software is perceived as boring, so a distinctive name helped them stand out in RFPs. It worked—they're now doing $10M ARR. But we wouldn't recommend the same approach for, say, a hospital management system.

The Naming Sprint: How We Actually Do This

Our brand sprint starts with positioning, not names. The name comes last, after we've defined:

1. Category: What shelf do you sit on in the buyer's mind?
2. Differentiation: What do you do that no one else does?
3. Audience: Who are you for? (Be specific. "B2B SaaS" is not an audience.)
4. Perception goal: How should people feel when they hear your name?

With that foundation, naming becomes easier. You're not looking for a name that describes your product. You're looking for a name that feels right for the position you want to own.

Then we test names against these criteria:

1. Distinctive in category: Does it stand out from competitors?
2. Searchable: Can we own the .com and Google results?
3. Scalable: Does it work as you expand beyond the initial product?
4. Trademarkable: Can you protect it legally?
5. Memorable: Can someone recall it 3 days after hearing it once?

Notice what's not on that list: passes the radio test.

If you're deciding between a safe, descriptive name and a distinctive name that requires a second of processing—in our experience, bet on distinctive. The startups that win their categories almost always have names that initially felt like a risk.

What to Do If You Already Have a Generic Name

You're reading this and thinking: "Shit, we're DataBridge Solutions."

Three options:

Option 1: Rebrand Before Your Series A

If you're pre-$5M ARR and haven't deeply penetrated your market yet, a rebrand is low-risk and high-reward. You can grandfather existing customers and launch the new name as part of your Series A announcement.

We've done this with several YC companies between seed and Series A. The rebrand signals momentum and gives you a narrative hook for the fundraise.

Option 2: Double Down on Positioning

If you can't change the name, you can out-position it. Make your tagline, messaging, and visual brand so sharp that the generic name becomes irrelevant.

Stripe is a payment processor. Boring category, not-obviously-great name (what does "stripe" have to do with payments?). But the positioning—"payments infrastructure for the internet"—and the brand execution turned it into a verb.

Your name is 20% of your brand. Positioning and design are the other 80%. Focus there.

Option 3: Lean Into the Obvious

Sometimes a descriptive name works if you're the category leader. HubSpot is generic but it works because they own inbound marketing. Salesforce is on-the-nose but they defined the category.

If you're in a new or emerging category and you can be the first to claim the obvious name, there's power in that. But you need to move fast—someone else will claim it otherwise.

The Real Radio Test for 2024

Here's the test that actually matters: Can your name be a verb?

Not literally (though that's nice). But does your name have enough distinction that people could say "I'll Figma that" or "Let me Notion it" or "We Ramped our spend management"?

If your name is so generic that it can't stand alone as a shorthand for the action your product enables, you have a naming problem.

The best startup names create their own linguistic space. They give people a new word to reach for when describing a workflow or problem. That's the real test.

FAQ: Startup Brand Naming

When should a startup rebrand vs. stick with their original name?

Rebrand if: (1) you're pre-Series A with under $5M ARR, (2) your name is actively confusing or generic, and (3) you're shifting positioning or expanding category. Stick with it if: you have strong brand recognition in your niche, customers use your name as a verb, or you're past $10M ARR—rebranding at scale is expensive and risky.

How do you know if a startup name is distinctive enough?

Test it in context: say it in a sentence with competitors. If it sounds interchangeable, it's not distinctive. Good test: Google your name + your category. If competitors show up in the first page, you have a SEO/distinctiveness problem. Also ask: does the name create curiosity or questions? Slight cognitive friction is good—it aids memory.

Should a startup name describe what the product does?

No—it should anchor a position, not describe features. Descriptive names (DataFlow, CodeBase) age poorly when you expand or pivot. Positional names (Ramp, Notion, Retool) give you room to grow. Your messaging and website describe what you do. Your name should make people feel something about who you are.

What makes a startup name trademarkable and legally safe?

Invented or suggestive names are easier to trademark than descriptive ones. Before finalizing, do a USPTO trademark search and hire an IP attorney to clear the name. Also check: .com availability, social handles, and Google results. If another company in tech owns the name (even in a different category), it's risky—search confusion will hurt you.

How important is owning the .com domain for a startup?

Critical if you're B2B or raising from tier-1 VCs. Investors see a .io or .co as a signal you couldn't afford or secure the real domain. Exceptions: if the .io is part of the brand (Socket.io) or you're in crypto/web3 where .xyz and .eth are normalized. But for 90% of startups, fight for the .com. It's worth the $10-50K to buy it from a squatter.