(Data-backed evidence from publicly reported aftermarket sales, 2024–2025)

Introduction: Power in Fewer Letters

There’s a reason the most memorable brands feel like they were always meant to exist: short words are more than “catchy.” They compress meaning, sound good out loud, and travel cleanly across languages. In the secondary domain market, that compression translates to value. And despite waves of new extensions and naming fads, 5–8-letter, alpha-only words continue to dominate both liquidity and pricing power.

This isn’t nostalgia for dot-com or a bias toward minimalism. It’s an empirical pattern you see whenever you aggregate enough sales data: shorter, stronger words trade more often and at higher medians than longer, more ornate names. That’s not because investors are traditionalists; it’s because end-users (the buyers who build brands) reward names that work at first glance, on first breath, across borders.

In this piece I’ll show — with real, publicly reported data — why compression still wins, how the numbers break down by length, and what that means for investors and founders choosing a name in 2025.

1) What “short, strong words” actually means

For clarity, I’m using alpha-only (no hyphens or numbers), word-like strings, 5 to 8 characters in length. That band is where phonetic smoothness, dictionary resonance, and cross-language portability intersect. It’s flexible enough to include coined forms (Klarna, Stripe, Notion) and dictionary roots (Atlas, Ember, Mint), and tight enough to exclude visually noisy names.

Why not 4 letters?
Four-letter names can be exceptional, but the pool is saturated with acronyms and consonant clusters that underperform in memorability unless they already have meaning (e.g., Zoom). The 5–8 band balances meaning and availability.

Why not 9–12?
Once you cross 8 letters, cognitive friction rises quickly: typing effort, error rates, visual clutter in logos, and the loss of punch in speech.

2) The liquidity reality: what sells most often by length

Across publicly reported aftermarket sales (2024–2025), the majority share of transactions falls into the 5–8 character zone. That’s not a taste opinion — it’s a distribution you can actually graph.

How to read this:

• 6–7-letter names are the modal lengths — the single most common in reported sales.
• 5 and 8 letters remain very active bands.
• Beyond 8 characters, transaction share drops sharply — not to zero (great 9–10 letter names absolutely sell), but enough to confirm the structural demand for compression.

Why this matters: If you’re an investor, liquidity is risk management. If you’re a founder, these are the names you’ll bid against others for; good ones are simply harder to find and more expensive for a reason.

3) Pricing power: medians peak in the compressed zone

Liquidity without price is just turnover. The question is: do short, strong words earn a premium? The answer, again, is visible in the data. Looking at median reported prices by length (2024–2025), medians crest in the 5–6–7 band and fade gradually after 8.

Why do medians matter more than averages here?
Because the domain market is heavy-tailed. A few six-figure outliers will distort averages, but they don’t change the market reality for most transactions. Medians tell you the typical result at each length — and at typical prices, compressed words outperform.

4) The cognitive economics of short words

This isn’t just fashion; it’s human factors:

1. Pronounceability: Fewer syllables and simpler clusters reduce phonological load. People remember what they can say.
2. Typeability: Shorter strings reduce motor effort and errors — a quiet advantage in mobile-first usage.
3. Visual balance: Designers can build powerful wordmarks faster around compact roots.
4. Semantic density: Short words often carry old meanings (Latin/Greek roots) or modern connotations (tech vocabulary) that compress a lot into a little.

If you want a single rule of thumb: clarity beats cleverness. Short words are clearer, which lets creative brand identity do the heavy lifting elsewhere.

5) “But what about new extensions? Aren’t those the future?”

New and niche extensions do serve specific positioning strategies — and some have momentum in 2024–2025 (notably .ai). But you can separate extension effect from word strength. A strong 6-letter root travels well across TLDs; a weak 11-letter coinage won’t sell just because it ends in .xyz or .app.

Three clarifications:

• .COM remains the liquidity king in reported sales (roughly three-quarters of volume). This isn’t because people are unimaginative; it’s because .com has become a global default for serious projects.
• .AI is a real, distinct market for companies explicitly branding around AI; short roots succeed there as well, often at premium medians relative to longer variants.
• New gTLDs reward exact phrase matches (e.g., voice.ai, studio.app), but word strength still drives outcomes. A crisp 6-letter word on a mainstream TLD often outperforms a longer phrase on a trend extension.

Core point: Extension choice is a multiplier, not a substitute. A powerful root is the base; the TLD multiplies the effect for the right audience.

6) Why 6–7 letters are the market’s center of gravity

Look at the shape of the two graphs together: they both peak around 6–7. That’s not arbitrary.

• At 5 letters, selection is constrained (more competition, less availability), but prices often jump when the word is a clean dictionary root or a global surname/stem.
• 6–7 letters maximize availability while retaining phonetic smoothness and semantic punch (Notion, Figma, Canva, Stripe, Rippling).
• 8 letters is still “short enough,” but longer strings begin to lose snap and raise logo/UX challenges.

For both investors and founders, this is why the search window commonly starts at 5–8. You get the best ratio of meaning-per-character without the scarcity penalty of four-letter acronyms or the friction penalty of 9–12.

7) The founder’s problem: short words are rare

It’s easy to say “just get a short, strong word.” The difficulty is supply. Truly universal, positive, non-niche words under 8 letters are finite — and most are spoken for.

This scarcity shapes three practical strategies:

1. Compound with restraint: If the root is taken, add a light modifier that keeps the phonetic profile tight (Mintly, AlloyX, Primeo).
2. Cross-language roots: Tap Latin/Greek stems with modern mouthfeel (Nova, Luma, Vanta, Atria).
3. Morphology before invention: Adjust suffix/prefix within familiar patterns (-ly, -io, -os, -ra, -um) rather than inventing unpronounceable strings.

The worst outcomes happen when teams stretch to 11 letters with multiple morphemes — they lose the very advantage they sought.

8) The investor’s problem: short words look expensive — and are

Premium 5–8 letter names are not cheap — but the carrying cost of buying the right root once is far lower than the lifetime cost of marketing a clumsy name.

For investors, the art is in discovering meaningful compression that hasn’t been fully priced:

• Roots with adjacent meanings that can travel industries (e.g., Forge → creation, Atlas → mapping/strength).
• Words with dual readings (literal + metaphorical).
• Short coined blends that sound dictionary-adjacent (Lumio, Aethera).

The two graphs guide buying discipline:

• If a 7-letter name is in a hot semantic cluster, you can expect both liquidity (Graph 1) and resale medians (Graph 2) to support your pricing thesis.
• If you’re speculating beyond 8 letters, make sure you’re buying a category-killer phrase or a high-intent two-word that will survive post-hype.

9) Why compression beats cleverness long-term

Trends age out; concision doesn’t. The reason short words keep their dominance is that they’re useful in every era of technology:

• In the dot-com era, short names cut through directory-style listings.
• In the mobile era, they reduced typing friction.
• In the AI era, they signal human authorship in a sea of generated sameness.

The more noise the internet produces, the more audiences seek names that feel inevitable. Short words carry that inevitability.

10) Addressing the median-price confusion

A common question: “If medians are only in the low thousands, why do great short names sell for five or six figures?” Because medians aggregate all TLDs and both wholesale and retail. The center of the market is filled with reseller flips and lower-end ccTLD trades. That doesn’t contradict the premium for top-tier short words — it highlights it. Against a broad baseline, truly strong short words stand out even more.

Use the median as your baseline risk; use short-word comps as your alpha target.

11) Practical buying rules (2025)

For founders

1. Start with 5–8 letters, alpha-only.
2. Prioritize pronounceability over novelty.
3. Test orally: 5 strangers, 5 seconds each — can they repeat it?
4. If .com is unavailable at budget, pair the right root with a credible TLD (.io, .ai, country if relevant).
5. Avoid double letters and uncommon clusters unless the sound is the brand.

For investors

1. Focus on roots with multiple industries of use.
2. When buying beyond 8 letters, demand obvious intent (clear phrase or category leader).
3. Use length data (like the two charts) to keep portfolio bias in the high-liquidity bands.
4. Reinvest profits from marginal flips into fewer, stronger roots.

12) Case study snapshots

• 6 letters / coined: Rippling’s counterpart root Ripple (6) shows why water-motion metaphors travel across fintech, crypto, wellness — the consonant-vowel pattern is irresistible.
• 5 letters / dictionary: Mint — value creation and freshness; near-universal semantic uptake; unforgettable in speech.
• 7 letters / classical root: Aether + modifier → Aethera (7) — airy, tech-adjacent, cross-linguistic, logo-friendly.

What unites these examples is phonetic smoothness and semantic depth — the traits buyers pay for.

13) The founder’s checklist (one minute)

• Is it 5–8 letters?
• Does it sound like a word (open vowels, balanced consonants)?
• Can you spell it after hearing it once?
• Does the logo look balanced with basic typography?
• Does it hold meaning across categories?
  If you get 5/5, you’re probably competing for it.

14) The investor’s checklist (one minute)

• Does it sit in the liquidity band (5–8) shown in Graph 1?
• Does the length align with the median premium (Graph 2)?
• Is the root historically durable (not a fad morpheme)?
• Does it travel across industries and geographies?
• Are there clean comps in the same length band?

15) Conclusion: Compression is not a trend — it’s a law

Short, strong words ruled the early web because the medium was slow and clunky. They rule 2025 because the medium is too fast. Attention compresses; names must too. The more AI accelerates content, the more brands need names that can anchor memory in human brains. That’s not a fad; it’s physiology.

The data from 2024–2025 say what branding wisdom has said for decades: the best names are short. Investors who keep their portfolios within the 5–8 band will see more bids and stronger medians; founders who choose compressed roots will spend less convincing people and more building products.

In the end, the internet still runs on a simple principle: if the name sticks, the story can begin.