8.09× return on ad spend for an e-commerce retailer

The challenge

Overlapping campaigns made it difficult for the e-commerce retailer to see which activity was supporting purchases. The work focused on making campaign roles clearer and comparing creative ideas against purchase reporting.

The approach

We separated prospecting and retargeting. Prospecting addresses people who may be new to the retailer; retargeting addresses people who have already interacted. Giving those activities separate roles makes their results easier to interpret than treating all audiences as one group.

Creative comparisons formed part of the account work, with reporting focused on tracked purchases and purchase value. This kept the review tied to the retailer's sales objective. A creative idea that attracts attention still needs to be assessed against the purchase outcomes recorded for it.

The outcome

The account recorded £107.6k in tracked purchase value from £13.3k in Meta ad spend, with a reported return on ad spend of 8.09×. The displayed value and spend are rounded; they should not be used to manufacture more precise campaign totals.

ROAS compares attributed purchase value with advertising spend. It does not deduct product costs, fulfilment, fees or returns, and it does not establish which purchases would have happened without the advertising. The recorded return therefore does not by itself prove profit or incremental revenue.

Our guide to Facebook Ads attribution explains why advertising reports and business sales records can differ.

About these figures

These are the retained reported campaign figures, confirmed by the business. No independent audit evidence is supplied here. A campaign period and attribution window are not supplied here, so the figures should not be used as a forecast for another campaign.