Brand Naming · Process
How to come up with a brand name — the 7-step process.
Most naming advice on the internet is shaped like a brainstorm — "mix two words together, try a thesaurus, ask ChatGPT for fifty options." That advice produces candidates. It does not produce a name. The difference is the work that happens before the brainstorm and the work that happens after.
Here is the seven-step process the best naming agencies — Lexicon, Operative Words, Eat My Words, Catchword — actually run. Brainstorm is step six. Verification is step seven. The first five steps are what make brainstorm and verification cheap.
Step 1 — Write the positioning in five words
Before any candidate appears, write the company in five words that a stranger at a bar would understand. Not the pitch. The category. "Issue tracker for software teams" (Linear). "Payments infrastructure for the internet" (Stripe). "Note-taking and docs for teams" (Notion). "AI pair-programmer" (Cursor). The five-word statement is the brief the name will be measured against; skipping it means you measure candidates against vibes.
The test: hand the five-word statement to a friend who knows nothing about the product. If they ask "what does that mean?" the brief is too fuzzy. Tighten it. The naming work happens at the resolution of the brief; a fuzzy brief produces a fuzzy shortlist.
Step 2 — Name the buyer's cohort
Who buys this? Not the persona deck. The cohort with a vocabulary. Infrastructure engineers between thirty and forty-five who read Hacker News. Marketers at Series B SaaS who live in Notion. Founders of seed-stage consumer companies who watch twenty-second TikToks. The cohort dictates the linguistic register the name lands in.
Linear was briefed against a cohort of infrastructure-leaning software engineers. The name had to feel like a Unix tool — short, hard consonants, one-syllable energy even at two syllables. Cursor was briefed against the AI-tooling cohort that already uses keyboard-first editors. Same lineage. Different cohort would not have picked either name.
Step 3 — Pick one emotion
At first encounter, what should the name make the buyer feel? Competence. Calm. Speed. Warmth. Gravity. Curiosity. Pick one. The phonemes encode the feeling — hard plosives (k, t, p) read fast; liquids and nasals (l, m, n, r) read warm; long vowels read grand. The Sapir & Köhler line of sound-symbolism research, summarized in Sound Symbolism for Brand Naming, gives you the empirical map.
Stripe is fast: hard /str/ onset, hard /p/ release. Notion is calm: nasal /n/ onset, soft sibilant close, no plosives. Cursor is precise: hard /k/, hard /r/, the /sɔːr/ that lands the eye exactly where the cursor lands on screen. The match between phoneme and feeling is not coincidental; it is the encoded craft of the naming agencies that priced these decisions for thirty years.
Step 4 — Pick a linguistic style
Real word, coined word, compound, Latinate root, mythology, deliberate misspelling, found-object: each style trades different properties. The Operative Words taxonomy gives nine clean buckets, and the choice between them is the most consequential decision before the brainstorm.
Real English word (Linear, Stripe, Notion, Cursor, Plain, Loops). Maximizes meaning. Minimizes domain availability. Maximizes §2(e)(1) descriptiveness risk if the word is too on-the-nose. Linear works because it is a property (linearity) that is metaphorically related to the product, not the product itself.
Coined word (Stripe is borderline; Mintlify, Tigris, Convex, Sardine, Anthropic, Persona). Maximizes distinctiveness. Maximizes trademark room. Minimizes first-encounter comprehension. Coined names cost more in category education and earn more in legal defensibility.
Latinate root (Linear, Vercel, Modal, Loops, Convex, Falcata). The current SaaS canon leans heavily on Latin: it sounds grown-up, clears trademark easily, and reads cleanly in English and most Romance languages. The current Y Combinator cohort has noticed.
Pick the style first. Then ask the brainstorm for candidates inside the style. A brainstorm without a style brief returns sixty candidates that span all of them, and the founder ends up comparing apples to oranges to coined Latinate apricots.
Step 5 — Write the constraints down
Before brainstorming, write the hard constraints. .com required, or aftermarket acceptable up to $X? USPTO clearance required in which Nice classes? Social handles acceptable as @brand or acceptable as @brandhq? Year-one and year-two launch markets — does the name need to survive Brazilian Portuguese, Mandarin, Hindi, Arabic?
Written constraints prevent the most expensive failure mode: discovering, in week fourteen, that the name does not pass a constraint nobody wrote down. The constraint sheet is the rebrand-prevention layer. Tape it to the wall.
Step 6 — Brainstorm against the brief
Now brainstorm. Sixty candidates is the right order of magnitude — not ten, not three hundred. Six rounds of ten. Each round opens a different drawer:
- Round 1 — Direct. Words that map directly to the positioning. These will mostly be too descriptive to clear trademark, but they map the territory.
- Round 2 — Metaphor. Properties of the product re-expressed as concrete nouns. Linear is a metaphor (linearity).
- Round 3 — Mythology. Greek, Roman, Norse, Egyptian. Apollo. Hermes. Athena. Falcata. Maps onto a cohort that reads books.
- Round 4 — Latinate. Latin and Romance roots. Vercel, Modal, Convex. The current SaaS register.
- Round 5 — Found-object. Stripe, Bolt, Loom, Plaid. A real word from an unrelated domain, deliberately repurposed.
- Round 6 — Coined. Synthesize sounds. Mintlify, Tigris, Sardine. The expensive distinctiveness move.
Read every candidate aloud. Words live in the mouth, not on the page. A word that looks good in twelve-point Inter and feels awkward on the third syllable is a word that will lose every sales call. Score each candidate against the five-word positioning, the cohort, the emotion, the style. Keep the top twelve.
Step 7 — Verify every finalist across five axes
The twelve finalists go through the five-axis verifier: trademark, domain, cultural meaning, sound symbolism, pronunciation resilience. The verdict is what decides which candidate ships. Every flag traces to a record number — the USPTO serial, the Wiktionary entry, the audio file of the misheard variant.
In our corpus, the median twelve-finalist shortlist contains two PROCEED candidates, five STRATEGIC candidates, three STRATEGIC candidates, and two ABANDON candidates. You will not know which is which until the verifier returns the verdict. The cost of running twelve candidates is fifteen seconds. The cost of skipping the step is the week-16 envelope and the $40K legal bill.
Four worked examples
Linear. Real English word, Latinate root, two syllables, calm-precise emotion. Cohort of infrastructure-leaning engineers. Cleared trademark cleanly in Class 9 and Class 42. The verdict was PROCEED at 94/100; see the Arq case study.
Stripe. Found-object, one syllable, hard plosive onset and release. Cohort of developers. The word means "a magnetic card stripe" and "a band of color" — the metaphor compounds. The .com cost six figures in aftermarket; the founders paid it because the word fit the brief that exactly.
Notion. Real English word, two syllables, soft-calm emotion. Cohort of knowledge workers. The word is a near-synonym of "idea," which maps to the product's job. Cleared trademark; cost a significant domain investment.
Cursor. Real English word, two syllables, hard-precise emotion. Cohort of AI-fluent developers. The word is a literal component of the editing surface — the metaphor is one step from the product. Cleared trademark in Class 9.
The three founder mistakes
Mistake 1 — Skip Steps 1 through 5. The founder jumps to brainstorm without writing the positioning, the cohort, the emotion, the style, or the constraints. The brainstorm returns sixty candidates that span every register, and the choice between them collapses into "I like that one." The shortlist is too noisy to verify cheaply.
Mistake 2 — Verify the favorite only. The founder picks one finalist and verifies that single candidate. The verdict comes back ABANDON. The founder is now emotionally attached to a name that does not clear, and spends three weeks trying to make it work instead of running the next eleven candidates through the verifier. The fix is to verify all twelve at once. The marginal cost is zero.
Mistake 3 — Verify the wrong Nice class. The USPTO trademark register is partitioned into 45 Nice classes. Founders default to Class 35 (advertising services) because it is the first one returned by most search UIs. The class that actually governs a software product is Class 9 (software) or Class 42 (SaaS), or both. Searching the wrong class produces a clean read on the right brand against the wrong register, which is exactly what happened in the founder's Office Action story.
Related reading
- What Makes a Good Brand Name — the 6 Criteria — the rubric a finished candidate has to pass.
- The Best Brand Naming Frameworks — Lexicon, Operative Words, Eat My Words, Catchword unpacked.
- The 7 Brand Naming Mistakes Founders Make — the full taxonomy of how names die in week 16.
Disclaimer
Etymolt operates under the Bureau Model. We surface clearance signals across the five axes; we do not provide legal advice. A trademark opinion belongs to a licensed attorney in your filing jurisdictions.
Take the next step
Verify a candidate across all five axes.
Five free clearances per IP. No signup. Every flag traces to a record number. Three seconds, end to end.
Verify a name