Most calculators are built on broad assumptions: injury severity, treatment duration, and time missed from work. Those factors matter, but they’re only part of the story.
In Tacoma cases, the biggest “calculator gap” is often evidence quality. Two people can have similar symptoms, yet one claim is valued much higher because the medical notes clearly link symptoms to the mechanism of injury (and document functional limits over time).
A calculator may give you a starting range. It cannot tell you how the other side will argue:
- that your symptoms were pre-existing or unrelated,
- that you delayed care, or
- that your limitations aren’t supported by objective findings.


