Matching is the mechanical heart of a leads marketplace: it's the operation that links a captured customer request on one side to the company best placed to answer it on the other. On leads-qualifie.ch, this pairing happens neither at random nor first-come-first-served: it rests on a set of objective criteria — category, geographic zone, configured volume, freshness of the request — and on a compatibility score that orders attribution among several possible candidates. Understanding this mechanism means understanding why a given request doesn't reach every company in a category, but only those whose profile genuinely matches the expressed need.
This dossier describes how matching works independently of the category consulted, whether insurance, skilled trades, real estate or business services. It details the two profiles matching has to link — the seller side, meaning the source that captured the final customer's intent, and the buyer side, the receiving company that defined its coverage area —, the matching criteria applied to each request, the compatibility score that ranks candidates, the traceability that documents every match, and how a request is distributed exclusively, shared, or with a cap on recipients.
What matching links: the seller profile and the buyer profile
Matching doesn't bring two strangers together at random: it links two profiles already described in advance on the platform. On the seller side — the supply side — sits the source that captured the request: a specialised site, a comparison platform, a partner form or a local network that gathered a final customer's intent and passed it on with its attributes (category of the need, location, degree of maturity). On the buyer side — the demand side — sits the receiving company, which has filled in an intake profile: the sectors it covers, the geographic zone where it operates, the volume of requests it wants to receive and its preference between an exclusive or a shared request. Matching is the operation that confronts these two descriptions to keep only the genuinely compatible pairs.
This double description is what makes matching both possible and verifiable. Without a precise intake profile on the buyer side, a platform could only broadcast every request to everyone, like a list resold in bulk; without reliable attributes on the seller side, it wouldn't know which category or zone to attach the request to. It's because both sides are described along the same dimensions — category, geography, volume, freshness — that the system can pair them symmetrically. Matching is therefore not a one-sided sort carried out for the benefit of a single side, but a confrontation of two profiles expressed in the same language, which guarantees that a request only reaches companies whose declared scope actually covers the need expressed.
The matching criteria applied to each request
Four main criteria govern the pairing. Category first: each request is attached to one of the catalogue's categories, and only companies active in that category enter the set of candidates. Geographic zone next: the location of the need is compared against the coverage area each company declared, whether a canton, a radius around a municipality, or a list of covered regions. Configured volume comes third: a company that has set a monthly cap already reached temporarily leaves the set of candidates, which avoids sending it requests it couldn't handle. Freshness last: a request is directed as a priority to companies able to call back quickly, since first-contact speed weighs heavily on conversion into an appointment.
These criteria don't apply one after another in a rigid sequence, but combine to form a set of admissible candidates for each request. A company must satisfy both category and zone at once to be eligible; volume and freshness then come in to order the remaining candidates. This explains a common observation: two companies in the same category and the same region don't necessarily receive the same requests, because their configured volumes, caps reached and usual response times differ. Matching is therefore not a simple checkbox, but the joint application of several objective conditions to each request taken individually.
The compatibility score that orders attribution
When several companies satisfy the eligibility criteria for the same request, matching doesn't separate them at random or first-come-first-served: it computes a compatibility score that orders attribution. This score aggregates several measurable signals: the precision of the geographic overlap between the need and the declared scope, the fit between the sub-type of request and the company's speciality, the responsiveness observed on previous requests, and the margin left against the configured volume. A company whose scope covers exactly the customer's municipality, that usually replies fast and hasn't yet reached its cap will get a higher score than an eligible but more distant company, or one already close to its limit.
This ranking by score is what sets structured attribution apart from undifferentiated broadcasting. Rather than sending every request to all eligible companies, the platform offers the request as a priority to the best-ranked ones, in decreasing order of compatibility, until it reaches the number of recipients set by the distribution mode. The score isn't fixed: it evolves with observed outcomes — a company that regularly leaves requests unanswered sees its position drop, while a responsive, well-rated company rises. Matching thus builds in a feedback loop that aligns the interest of receiving companies with that of the final customer, without either side having to negotiate directly with the other.
Verified sources and traceability of every match
A match is only worth something if the request it attributes comes from a verified source. Before entering the pairing mechanism, each request goes through a check: validity of the phone number and e-mail address, coherence of the information provided, and proof of explicit consent from the final customer to be contacted by a professional in the sector. The sources feeding the platform are themselves assessed continuously: a source that regularly submits unreachable contact details, or requests already handled elsewhere, sees its flow downgraded, regardless of how long it's been active. Matching therefore never works on raw, unverified data, but on requests already filtered upstream.
To this verification is added traceability: every match is documented. The platform keeps the origin of the request — which source captured it and at what moment —, the criteria that led to the attribution, the number of receiving companies and the timestamp of the transmission. This traceability serves two functions. On one side, it lets a receiving company dispute a request that is clearly out of scope or a duplicate, and obtain arbitration based on verifiable elements rather than subjective judgment. On the other, it lets the operator audit the behaviour of sources and adjust their ranking. Without this dual requirement — sources verified upstream, matches traced downstream — matching would be nothing but an opaque redistribution; it's traceability that makes it controllable by both sides.
Exclusive, shared or capped: how matching distributes a request
Matching isn't limited to choosing which companies are compatible: it also decides how many of them will receive the same request. Three modes structure this distribution. In exclusive mode, the request is attributed to a single company — the one best ranked by the compatibility score — which is then the only one holding the customer's contact details. In shared mode, the same request is passed to a small number of companies, always capped and known in advance, so the customer can compare several proposals without being swamped with calls. In both cases, the number of recipients is set contractually and never left to unlimited discretion.
This distribution cap is an essential parameter of matching, because it governs the balance between the two sides of the market. A cap set too high would devalue every request for receiving companies, while a cap set too low would deprive the final customer of comparison. The distribution mode is part of the intake profile: a company chooses to receive exclusive requests, shared ones, or a mix of both, and matching takes this into account when building the list of recipients. It's the combination of this known cap, the compatibility score and the eligibility criteria that makes matching a legible mechanism for both sides: the seller knows the rules under which its request will be distributed, the buyer knows the rules under which it will receive it, and neither depends on the opaque goodwill of the other.