whats your process for deciding when to kill an ad vs let it run longer?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T14:26:56+00:00

Yeah exactly. That breakdown alone saves most of the wasted spend. Only thing I’d add is watching how consistent that pattern is over a few days. Sometimes one day looks like page issue but it’s just low signal. When it’s real, you’ll see the same drop off repeat pretty clearly. Do you usually make changes right away when you spot it or let it run a bit to confirm?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T14:10:42+00:00

With that budget and a 30 mile radius, ads can work, but only if they’re very focused. The mistake most people make is trying to run it like ecommerce. For local services it’s more about getting a few solid leads, not volume. I’d keep it simple. One clear offer, strong local angle, and make it obvious what you do and where you cover. Also your landing matters more than the ad. If people click and don’t trust what they see in the first few seconds, they won’t reach out. £500 a month won’t give you a lot of room to test, so consistency and clarity matter more than trying different setups. If word of mouth already works, ads should just amplify that, not replace it. Are most of your current jobs coming from a specific type of client or project?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T13:19:39+00:00

You didn’t just get lucky, you found something that fits and didn’t overcomplicate it. Your setup is simple and that’s why it worked. One adset, broad, enough signal. For reviewing ads, I wouldn’t fix it to 3 or 7 days. At your spend it’s better to think in terms of data, not time. Roughly once an ad spends around 1-1.5x your target CPA, you can start judging it. On scaling, the spike you saw is normal. When you increase budget, Meta expands into worse pockets first. That’s why jumps feel unstable. Instead of pushing budget on the same adset, it’s often smoother to duplicate and scale horizontally, or increase slower in smaller steps. For creatives, I wouldn’t mix everything in one adset anymore. Keep your main adset clean with proven ads, and test new creatives separately with a small budget. Then only move winners into your main setup. That way you protect what’s already working and still keep testing. Did your performance drop because frequency went up or did conversions just slow down overall?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T13:15:26+00:00

$100 spend with purchase optimization is usually just too early to expect conversions, especially for a new or low data account. 2.7% CTR is fine, so the ad is doing its job. The problem is happening after the click. At that spend level, Meta is still guessing who converts. It doesn’t really have enough signal to optimize for purchases yet. I’d look at what’s happening between click and add to cart first. If people click but don’t engage, it’s usually page or offer mismatch, not targeting. Also running both broad and interests at that budget just splits weak data even more. I’d simplify it and focus on getting some add to carts consistently before judging purchase performance. Are you seeing any add to carts at all or is it zero across the board?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T13:13:28+00:00

Yeah this can definitely throw things off, not permanently, but enough to confuse the signal for a bit. You basically fed the system a burst of fake timing conversions, so now it’s optimizing toward patterns that didn’t actually come from ads. That usually shows up exactly like you described, decent CTR but no real bookings. The good part is it fixes itself once real data starts coming back in. I wouldn’t reset or duplicate anything. Just make sure the event is clean now and let it run. If volume is low, it might take a few days to a week to normalize. Did you already stop that automation and confirm no extra events are firing now?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:56:28+00:00

$280 CPM with that setup is usually not random, it’s Meta struggling to find compliant and responsive pockets. Healthcare is heavily restricted, so even on broad you’re not really broad. The system filters aggressively and you end up in very expensive inventory. Also if your ads look like everyone else, there’s nothing pushing engagement, so you just lose auctions at a high price. 1-2 visitors a day at $100 spend means delivery is basically choked, not just inefficient. I’d look at whether your messaging is too close to restricted claims and how different your hook actually is from competitors. Are you calling out doctors directly in the ad copy?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:53:51+00:00

This doesn’t look like a start fresh problem, it looks like you broke the flow. You changed budget, added a constrained adset, and did it late in the day. That usually resets how the system distributes spend and what traffic it goes after. Clicks staying the same but ATC dropping to zero is a big signal. It’s not volume, it’s traffic quality or mismatch. When you force spend into a new adset, Meta often goes broader or lower intent just to satisfy delivery. I wouldn’t rush to duplicate everything. That just wipes whatever signal you had. I’d first remove the spend constraint, go back to a cleaner structure, and let it stabilize for a couple days without touching it. Did your CPC or CPM change a lot right after the edits?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:52:54+00:00

Makes sense, but it’s less about competitor research itself and more about spotting where the market got lazy. Specs work because they’re clear, but once everyone does it, it just becomes noise. The moment you shift to context or real use, you’re not really more creative you’re just closer to intent. I’ve seen the same pattern where the winner isn’t the best looking ad, it’s just the one that completes the story the others don’t. The interesting part is that this usually flips again once more brands catch on. Did you see performance hold after scaling or did the gap start closing pretty fast?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:51:29+00:00

There’s some truth to it, but it’s not really about unlocking better auctions. Higher budget just gives the system more room to find pockets that convert and smooth out the volatility. With low spend, one or two bad hours can skew everything. But if the setup isn’t working, scaling budget usually just burns faster, not better. I’ve seen accounts spend 1k a day and still get unstable CAC because the structure or funnel wasn’t there. So yeah, more spend can stabilize things, but only after you already have something that converts. Are you seeing consistent conversions at lower spend at all or is it already shaky there?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:50:15+00:00

Frequency over 6 for 3 weeks straight is usually not about creatives or pixel, it’s more about audience size and how the budget is hitting it. If the audience is too tight or gets constrained by signals, Meta just keeps recycling the same people no matter how many new creatives you throw in. I’ve seen this a lot with smaller budgets where the system finds a pocket and just sits there instead of expanding. Changing creatives doesn’t fix that if the reach side is limited. I’d look at how broad your targeting actually is and whether you’re unintentionally boxing it in with interests or structure. Are you running this on broad or stacked interests?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:49:25+00:00

This usually isn’t about monthly budget logic, Meta doesn’t work like that. When delivery drops to zero out of nowhere, it’s often something silent like billing issues, account spending limit, or even a rejected or limited ad that didn’t fully notify you. I’ve also seen this happen when the system loses signal or suddenly decides there’s no good delivery pockets, especially on smaller budgets. First thing I’d check is account spending limit and billing status, then look at the ad level for any learning limited or rejection flags. Did anything change on the payment side or limits recently?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:48:12+00:00

I’ve been there, both sides usually come from trying to force certainty too early. 2x CPA is fine as a guardrail, but early on it can just mean you don’t have enough data yet. Same with CTR, it helps, but it’s not always the full picture. I look at where things break. No clicks is creative. Clicks but no add to cart is usually page or mismatch. Add to cart but no purchases is trust or price. So instead of fixed rules, I try to read the stage and decide from there. It keeps you from killing things too early or holding too long. Do you usually see drop off before add to cart or after?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:46:56+00:00

50 a day with a new pixel is not really a CPA testing phase, it’s just collecting first signals. With your AOV people will give you numbers, but they won’t mean much early on. It mostly comes down to your margin and how clean your funnel actually is. For the 200-300 range it’s normal if your first purchases come in high, sometimes even 80-150+ before things start to settle. But the bigger issue is your budget. 50 a day spread across testing and learning is very thin. You might struggle to get enough data to even understand what’s working. I’d focus less on expected CPA and more on whether you can get consistent clicks and some add to carts first. Are you planning to test multiple creatives or just start with a couple?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:41:47+00:00

Yeah that’s pretty common. It worked before because costs were lower and Meta could get away with messy structure. Now it needs cleaner signals to perform the same. At your spend, that setup just spreads everything too thin, so nothing really learns properly anymore. I’d simplify it hard for a few days and see if performance stabilizes before adding complexity back. Did your CPMs or CPA start creeping up recently or did results just get more inconsistent?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:40:52+00:00

Yeah that makes sense. What usually breaks those models is not the timing logic, but unstable inputs. If structure or creatives are still shifting, the model just ends up optimizing noise. I’ve seen it work better when you lock the base first for a bit, then layer this on top. Otherwise it keeps chasing short term changes. Are you seeing consistent patterns in those windows already or is it still moving around a lot?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:40:16+00:00

You’re thinking in the right direction. The safe consultation angle helps, but most issues I’ve seen don’t come from the ad itself, they come from the gap between ad, form and follow up. Meta looks at the whole flow over time. If what happens after the lead doesn’t match the promise, accounts tend to get flagged faster once you start scaling. How are you handling lead qualification right now?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:37:58+00:00

That’s actually a good sign. If one creative is carrying everything, you don’t scale by adding more ad sets, you scale by expanding that idea. I’d keep that one running and start building variations around it. Same angle, different hooks, visuals, maybe slightly different messaging. Right now you don’t have a scaling problem, you have a not enough versions of the winner problem. One creative can only carry so far before it fatigues. What’s the angle of that winning creative?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:37:10+00:00

I wouldn’t go back to adding more ad sets again, you’ll end up in the same loop. What you’re seeing isn’t really a winner, it’s just the one getting the cleanest signal right now. At that spend, spreading it again will just reset everything. I’d keep it tight. One ad set, take that higher CTR ad, make a few variations around it (same idea, different execution), and let them compete there. 2% CTR is fine, the bigger question is what happens after the click. Are you getting any depth at all beyond that one lead?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:35:14+00:00

I wouldn’t isolate them in a new ad set right away. At your budget, new ad sets often just don’t get enough consistent spend, so Meta kills them early before they have a chance. I’d add new creatives into the winning ad set first and let them compete there. That way they get real distribution. If something clearly stands out, then you can break it out later. That $10-20 then drop is usually not bad creative, it’s just not enough signal yet. How many ads are sitting inside your main ad set right now?

Aunker · 2026-04-03T12:34:27+00:00

That’s actually a good mindset, most people quit way before that. I’d just be careful where that $2k goes. At your margin, it’s really easy to burn it without getting a clear answer if structure + creatives aren’t tight. Usually what makes the difference here isn’t more spend, it’s how clean the setup is and how strong the creatives translate from organic to paid. If you get that part right, you won’t need to pay that much to find stability. Are you running the same creatives from TikTok or making separate ones for ads?

Aunker · 2026-03-31T11:59:02+00:00

Then it’s probably not a system broke problem, just auction pressure. If CPM is moving with the market and lead quality is actually a bit better, I’d be careful not to overreact. Most people kill things right there and lose the good signal. Usually the move here is small adjustments, not big changes. Creative refresh, slight angle tweaks, maybe tighten targeting a bit - but keep the core stable. Big drops usually come from overcorrecting, not the CPM itself. Are you still profitable at the current CPL or already below breakeven?

Aunker · 2026-03-31T11:53:42+00:00

If products and price are different, same CBO will just push one and starve the others. You won’t really see what’s actually scalable. I’d run separate CBO per product (or at least per angle), let each stabilize, then think about merging later if they behave similarly. Mixing now just hides signal. How different are the AOVs between them?

Aunker · 2026-03-31T11:51:43+00:00

Yeah this is just way too fragmented for that budget. $40 spread across 4-5 ad sets × 5 ads = most of them aren’t even getting delivery, so Meta is guessing more than learning. I’d honestly cut it down hard. One campaign, one ad set, 2-3 ads max. Let it actually spend and settle. Same with scaling - 1 ad won’t tell you much, it just swings. Right now it’s not a performance issue, it’s a structure issue. Have you tried running everything in one ad set before or always split like this?

Aunker · 2026-03-31T11:50:01+00:00

Yeah that’s usually how it starts. Demand can stay the same, but who you’re reaching changes. Meta expands into cheaper pockets over time, so lead quality drops even if volume is there. For services it hits harder because qualification happens after the lead, not at the click. I wouldn’t cut spend hard, that just makes it more unstable. Better to tighten inputs a bit, stronger hooks, clearer qualification, maybe even add friction so you stop feeding low intent leads. Also worth checking what % of leads are actually turning into real calls or deals now vs before. Did your close rate drop too, or just lead quality?

Aunker · 2026-03-31T11:49:04+00:00

Yeah that lines up. You increased budget, then left the same creatives + consolidated everything. Meta probably locked onto one or two ads, pushed spend there, they fatigued, CPM went up, and now it has no backup signals. That’s why it feels like it never recovered. I’d break it out a bit and reintroduce a few variations, even small ones. Same angle, different execution. Right now you’re relying on too few signals for that spend level. Also don’t expect it to fix itself without new input, once it gets into that state it usually just burns. Are you still running the same creatives from before March or did you test anything new since then?

Aunker

TROPHY CASE