sculpt+ · Product design · Wireframing flows
Everything for the Home page in one place: inspiration, the shipped screen, the dashboard pass, the four hero concepts, and our own experiments.
Kept as the research record. This page is the migration of the Figma board and is accurate to it — the nine inspiration screens, the shipped screen against the dashboard pass, and the original four hero concepts. Its scoring maths is superseded: concepts 1–4 and section 5 describe the rev-3 model (progress × sustainability, 0–100). Rev 4 replaced it with a 300–850 credit score on five published weights. For the current model see Sculpt Score in the bar above.
01 Inspiration
Nine home screens and the one device worth taking from each.
Three composite scores as the product identity. The pattern we are adapting — but its data is involuntary (the strap measures you asleep), so a ring is never empty. Ours is voluntary and intermittent. Take the idea of an owned score; do not take the ring count.
The anti-Whoop, and the closest thing to our sustainability multiplier. The hero is a recommendation to rest, with a load bar that turns red when you are overreaching. Proof that "do less today" can be a headline rather than an absence of data.
A process as the hero: Scheduled → Processing → Results Ready on a three-stage bar. This is Concept 4's phase rail, already shipped by someone else. Take the staged bar for Bulk → Mini cut → Peak.
The coach speaks first, in full prose, above any number. "Active Intelligence" is a paragraph with a stat card beneath it. Closest to our coach thesis of anything here — and it shows how much text a hero can carry.
Full-bleed photographic hero behind a thin arc. Number, then verdict in serif ("Goal reached"), then one sentence. Secondary scores live in a horizontal scroller above. Take the arc-plus-verdict stack from Concept 1.
One big ring in its own card, then a 2×2 of tiles with mini sparklines. Structurally identical to the dashboard grid we already built. Confirms the layout; take the restraint — each tile carries one number and one chart, nothing else.
Three rings inside one card with a narrative line underneath, so the rings read as a set rather than three separate stats. Also the segmented energy bar — a good alternative to a ring for a 0–100 value.
Extreme reductionism, pure black and white. One metric, three timeframes, a week strip of filled circles. The black card for the global stat is a strong contrast device. Take the discipline, not the scope.
Week strip of day circles, then a four-stat row (Distance / Pace / Time / Achievements) under an activity headline. The cleanest way we have seen to summarise a session.
02 Current vs Dashboard
The shipped screen at 2,784px against the same information as a density hierarchy at 1,156px. Each frame below scrolls at its true length.
The shipped screen. Thirteen full-width blocks, every one 358 wide, 2,784px of scroll — 3.3 phone screens. No density hierarchy, so nothing is a headline and nothing is a glance. The three chart cards spend 942px to render four numbers, three of which are zero.
Same information, arranged as a density hierarchy: coach band, a 2-up today row, a 2×2 stat grid, three sparklines. 1,156px — under 1.4 screens, and 4 visible data points become 11. The reminder cards become structural rather than a dismissible notification, and the coach line owns the top slot. StatTile carries all four states and must be built before any stat sits on it (ENG‑2140).
The same screen for a user with one logged session, which is the real state for 95% of the base. Rule: never more than one insufficient tile on screen. Show the one nearest unlocking with its progress, and collapse every other not-ready stat into UNLOCKING SOON with the condition beside it. Insufficient reads empty and dashed; locked reads solid with the real number blurred behind it. The locked tiles stay — they are the conversion mechanic, not a data state, and they read strongest when everything around them is quiet.
03 Hero concepts
Concept 3 is the recommendation.
One trajectory element: start, where you are, target, deadline. Same shape renders pounds, miles, or a weight class — universal by construction. This is really Ring A of Concept 2 drawn as an arc rather than a circle.
Strength — one element, one question, works for any goal type. The arc is the same whether the axis is pounds, miles or a weight class.
Weakness — it is progress only. Nothing here stops a user speedrunning the goal, which is the property Sculpt Score exists to provide. Readiness sits below as a sibling rather than as a constraint on the headline.
Two rings because we have exactly two distinct daily measures: are you on track, and are you recovered enough to keep going. The build plan's own rule for ring count — arrived at from our data rather than copied from Whoop's three.
Strength — honest ring count, and the two halves answer different questions so neither is redundant. Readiness is visible as a first-class daily measure.
Weakness — two numbers is two things to interpret, and nothing binds them. A user can be 95 on track and 20 ready and the screen does not say that combination is a problem. That binding is exactly what Concept 3 adds.
One owned number. PROGRESS × SUSTAINABILITY, capped at 1.0 so recovery and fuel can only hold you back, never push you up. You cannot buy score with intensity — moving faster than the healthy rate lowers it.
Strength — one owned number, and the only one of the four that cannot be gamed. Sustainability as a multiplier means intensity never buys score, and overshooting the healthy rate actively lowers it. Gives N5 safety rails somewhere to live other than copy guidance. Works for every goal type: only the Coverage row swaps.
Weakness — a composite is opaque by nature. Mitigated by showing the formula on the screen and by capping daily movement at ±3 so it reads as a trend. Still the concept most dependent on the coach line to explain itself.
Open — component weights, how hard the recovery penalty bites, and whether the score carries across goal cycles. All need real user data, not more design.
The only concept that makes sequencing legible. "Bulk to 180 by March, then mini cut for summer" is two chained GoalCycles — nothing in the product expresses that today. Weakest as a daily-moving number; strongest at showing a plan that has parts.
Strength — the only concept that shows a plan with parts, which is what "bulk then cut" and every event goal (marathon, fight camp) actually are. Makes the GoalCycle successor link visible and gives the coach a place to propose changing the plan, not just reporting on it.
Weakness — barely moves day to day. A rail that looks identical for a week is not a reason to open the app, so it cannot carry the hero slot alone.
Recommendation — not a competing hero. Ship this as a thin rail beneath Concept 3, where it adds sequencing without needing to move daily.
04 Our experiments
Synthesised from the mood board — each takes one proven device and applies it to Sculpt Score.
From Bevel — put the score and its contributors inside a single card so they read as one idea with a narrative, rather than as separate competing stats.
Takes Bevel's containment. The score and what built it live in one card with one sentence, so the eye reads a single claim instead of four numbers competing. Contributors are small on purpose — they are evidence, not stats.
Sculpt Score across every active goal dimension, not one weight target. Each dimension carries its own pace and verdict; the score unifies them, weighted by deadline proximity.
The portfolio made literal. Three dimensions, three paces, three verdicts, one score — and the coach names which dimension is moving the number. This is the shape GoalCycle cannot express: it holds one axis and supersedes the rest.
What unifying buys you. Bulking and cutting on overlapping dates cannot both succeed — an average would hide that. Conflict is over-reach in planning, so it lands in the same multiplier as over-reach in execution.
The payoff of one score over three progress bars: a contradiction becomes visible and actionable. Note the score is depressed by planning, not by effort — the copy says so explicitly, because telling a user who trained well that they scored 51 needs a reason.
100 is on plan, not full. The arc runs 0–150 with the healthy band marked on it, so behind and speedrunning are the same geometry read in opposite directions — and going past the band renders as a distinct dashed segment, never as more of the same fill.
Zones: <85 behind · 85–115 on plan · 115–130 ahead · >130 too fast. Band width derives from each dimension's own safe-rate range, so a fighter's band is tighter than a six-month bulk. Open: daily movement cap — ±8 proposed, needs calibration against real logs.
Every contributor taps open. Four things each explainer must answer: what it measures, where your number came from, why it is at that level, and what moves it. A composite nobody can explain back to you has failed.
Four questions per stat, always in the same order — measures / source / why now / what moves it. "Where your number comes from" carries n, which is the trust rule made visible. Open: does every row expand, or only the one the coach names as today's cause?
05 Sculpt Score — the components
Every term in the score, broken out as its own component. Additive terms can move you either side of 100; penalty terms only ever subtract. Each carries what it measures, where it reads from, and what it does to the number.
The formula
Sculpt Score = 100 + pace + adherence + coverage − recovery − fuel − conflict
Additive terms — can move you either side of 100
Penalty terms — only ever subtract
