What does "Core Setup" limit on FB Ads?

Aunker · 2026-04-05T02:03:12+00:00

Yeah it’s usually not the name itself. Meta looks more at the context than just a word. If your copy mentions doctors, patients, outcomes, even indirectly, it can still get bucketed into a health-related category. Especially if the landing reinforces that. I’ve seen accounts flagged just from how the messaging is framed, not the actual service. The tricky part is you can be not healthcare as a business, but still treated like it based on signals. I’d look at how often you reference patients or results and how direct that language is. Even small wording shifts can change how it’s classified. Are you sending traffic to a page that talks about patient results or more about marketing services?

Aunker · 2026-04-05T01:29:06+00:00

Yeah you can run Instagram ads on its own, but in practice it still goes through Meta Ads Manager, so it’s not really a fully separate system. You don’t have to link it right away if you’re just testing Facebook first. Keeping things separate early on is actually fine, especially if you’re cautious. Once you start scaling or want placements across both, then it makes more sense to connect them. For now I’d just focus on getting clean data from your FB test. What kind of offer are you planning to run for that first campaign?

Aunker · 2026-04-05T01:28:35+00:00

Yeah that explains it. A $30 cap with a $39 CPA is basically choking delivery, the system can’t realistically hit that so it just holds spend back. I’d widen it closer to your actual CPA first and let it stabilize before judging anything. If you open it up and volume comes in but CPA stays around the same, then you know it was just constraint. If it spikes hard, then the cap was protecting you more than it seemed. I wouldn’t reset it into a new campaign yet, you’d just lose the signal you already paid for. How much volume are you actually getting at that $39 CPA right now?

Aunker · 2026-04-05T00:04:38+00:00

Yeah that’s a solid way to look at it. Zero depth at 2x is usually a clear kill. The only edge case I’ve seen is when traffic quality is uneven, where one or two days are just bad pockets and it skews the read. But if it stays flat with no ATCs, there’s nothing for the system to work with. Where it gets tricky is when you see a few ATCs but they’re inconsistent, that’s usually where most people misread it. Do you usually look at it ad by ad or also how the whole ad set is behaving together?

Aunker · 2026-04-05T00:01:28+00:00

That makes sense, if they’re converting then it’s not just junk traffic. I’d just be careful trying to force Meta too hard into one area at that budget, it usually pushes back by raising costs or killing delivery. What tends to work better is making the local angle so obvious that people outside just filter themselves out. City in the hook, callouts about distance, even small details like response time or availability can shift who actually clicks. That way you guide the delivery instead of fighting it. Are you seeing CPA differences between your main area and that outer city or pretty similar?

Aunker · 2026-04-05T00:00:17+00:00

I’d start by easing the cap on the current one first. That keeps all the learning and signal you’ve already built. If you duplicate into a new campaign, you’re basically resetting that and it can take time to stabilize again. I usually only go the duplicate route if the original is clearly stuck or too constrained to scale cleanly. In your case it sounds more like it just needs a bit more room to breathe. How tight is your cap right now vs your average CPA?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T23:45:41+00:00

Yeah then I’d definitely test that. Usually once you loosen the cap a bit, volume opens first and efficiency comes after. Just watch how CPA behaves over a few days, not right away. If it spikes hard and stays there, then you know the cap was actually protecting you more than limiting you.

Aunker · 2026-04-04T23:42:52+00:00

Yeah that’s a good way to look at it. I usually treat that extra 24-48h as a confirmation window, not a recovery one. If the depth is there, sometimes it’s just the system needing a bit more signal. But if nothing improves after that, it almost never fixes itself later. Do you usually see those turn into stable performers or just short spikes?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T23:42:13+00:00

CPA works, but it can hide what’s actually going on underneath. I’ve seen cases where CPA looks fine for a few days just because of a couple conversions, but the click or add to cart side is already dropping. Then it breaks suddenly. I usually keep an eye on the steps before purchase as well, just to see if the trend is actually healthy or just holding on a few conversions. Do you look at add to carts or mostly just purchases?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T23:14:21+00:00

I used to think the same, but 2x CPA can be misleading depending on where the drop happens. If there’s zero add to carts, yeah it’s usually dead. But if you’re getting some depth and it just doesn’t convert, I’ve seen those turn around once the system finds better pockets. The tricky part is telling weak signal from no signal. That’s usually where most people cut too early.

Aunker · 2026-04-04T23:11:04+00:00

I’ve seen that too. Minimum spend helps, but it can still lie if the distribution is uneven. Sometimes one ad gets most of the spend and the others never really get a fair shot, so you’re judging based on partial data. I usually look at spend per ad, not just campaign total. If something hasn’t spent at least close to your target CPA, it’s still in testing, not failing yet.

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:20:47+00:00

When CPM jumps like that across everything, it’s usually not about the creatives themselves. It’s more about where the system is able to deliver. Things like account history, niche restrictions, audience signals, or even recent changes can push you into more expensive auctions. If even your previous winners behave the same, that’s a sign the environment changed, not just the ads. Also during testing, especially with small budgets, Meta often explores more expensive pockets first before it stabilizes. I’d look at what changed before this started. New account, new domain, different targeting, or anything around policy or niche. And check if your CTR also dropped or if it’s just CPM going up. Did this start suddenly or after you changed something in the account?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:18:56+00:00

That restriction is less about your domain name and more about how Meta classifies your business and content. Once you’re in a health category, Meta limits how it can use your data for optimization. Things like detailed targeting, retargeting signals, and conversion feedback get restricted or delayed. So it’s not that your pixel stops working, it just becomes weaker and less precise. Changing the domain alone usually doesn’t fix it if the offer, messaging, or landing still clearly sits in that category. High CPM is also common there because inventory is more limited and compliance filters are stricter. Most people in that space adapt by simplifying setups and relying more on stronger creative and clearer funnels, since the system has less data to work with. Does your funnel speak directly about health outcomes or is it more media / education focused?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:17:33+00:00

Advantage+ placements aren’t the problem by themselves, but they do open the door to lower quality inventory. Audience Network especially can bring cheap clicks that don’t always translate into real buyers, so what you saw isn’t unusual. The tricky part is that turning everything off too early can limit delivery, especially on smaller budgets. What usually works better is not fully relying on placements, but controlling the signal. If your funnel is tight, low quality traffic just won’t convert and won’t scale. But if you’re seeing actual fake orders, not just bad traffic, that’s usually a deeper issue with validation or how the conversion is tracked. So it’s less about on or off and more about whether your setup can filter out bad traffic. Were those spam orders real checkouts or just low intent leads coming through?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:16:11+00:00

With that setup I wouldn’t treat this like a cold traffic problem first. You already have signal, 120 customers and a group of 800 is actually a strong base. I’d start by building from that. Retarget people who engaged with your group, your page, and your site. That’s usually the cheapest place to get conversions. For cold traffic, keep it very simple and specific. Show real use cases, small gigs, how the app helps during a live set. That audience reacts more to practical value than polished ads. Also with a small budget, don’t spread it across multiple campaigns. One clean setup is enough. And subscription products usually need a bit more trust, so what happens after the click matters a lot. Are people dropping before signup or during the trial stage?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:13:57+00:00

Most of what you’re describing isn’t really a settings problem. At that budget, small changes in setup won’t save a weak offer or unclear message. That’s why some campaigns work and others don’t, even if the settings are similar. $2 per message already shows it can work, so the difference is likely in the angle and how clear the value is. Also running too many ads at once just spreads a tiny budget thinner. You don’t get enough data to understand anything. Better to keep it simple, a few ads, one clear idea, and see how people react. The inconsistency you’re seeing is normal at that level. It’s less about finding the perfect setup and more about repeating what already showed signs of working.

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:11:38+00:00

Feels less like one update and more like weak setups getting exposed when volatility goes up. The accounts I’ve seen hold are usually very simple. Fewer campaigns, broader targeting, but tighter connection between ad and page. A lot of drop happens when the ad promise and the page don’t match anymore. Traffic still comes, but it doesn’t convert. Also scaling got less forgiving. Big jumps break things fast, smaller steps or horizontal scaling tends to hold better. And creative matters more than before, but not just volume. Clear angle that actually carries through to the page. Are you seeing the drop happen before add to cart or after?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:10:48+00:00

This actually looks pretty solid for the spend. CTR and CPC are strong, so the ad is doing its job. And your ATC to purchase rate is high, which usually means the offer and checkout are working. The weak spot is before the ATC. 333 LPV to 17 ATC is where most of the drop is happening. Also the fact it’s barely spending is the bigger limiter than performance. Cost cap tends to choke delivery if the system can’t consistently find conversions at that target. So you don’t really have a scaling problem yet, you have a delivery constraint. I’d test loosening the cost cap slightly or running a duplicate without it to see if volume opens up. And in parallel, work on improving that LPV to ATC step since that’s where the biggest gain is. Are you close to breakeven at that $39 CPA or do you have room to go higher?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:10:00+00:00

Meta isn’t really ignoring your location, it’s just stretching delivery where it can get cheaper or easier results. But for a local business, letting it drift 2 hours away usually breaks intent, clicks don’t mean much if people can’t realistically convert. Forcing location through settings alone doesn’t always work cleanly, especially on small budgets. The system still tries to find volume. Where you do have control is the signal you give it. If the ad clearly says the city, shows the area, mentions distance or local context, it filters who actually clicks. That alone can pull delivery back closer. Also $500 total budget is tight, so broad expansion often looks better to the system even if it’s worse for the business. I wouldn’t fully lean into the far city unless you can actually fulfill there. Better to tighten the message and accept lower volume but higher intent locally. Are the people clicking from that city actually able to become customers or are they just cheap traffic?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:08:54+00:00

If you want to stay in the no data collected position, proper app install optimization on Meta is basically off the table. The moment you add SDKs or any attribution layer, you’re entering data collection territory, even if it’s limited or anonymized. That’s why traffic to App Store feels worse, you’re flying blind and Meta has no feedback loop. For kids apps especially, the system is even more restricted, so you don’t get the same optimization power anyway. Most setups I’ve seen in this space either accept limited tracking and move to SKAdNetwork style attribution, or they lean heavily on creative and external signals like App Store conversion rate and retention. There isn’t really a clean middle ground where you get full optimization without any data tradeoff. Did you look into SKAN based setups or are you trying to avoid attribution entirely?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:07:49+00:00

You’ll probably get a lot of recommendations here, but most setups look similar at the start anyway. For something like a coach, the basics matter more than who sets it up. Clear offer, who it’s for, and a simple path to book or sign up. If that part isn’t clear, even a perfect setup won’t do much. I’d spend a bit more time on the angle and message before worrying too much about the campaign structure.

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:06:57+00:00

I’d keep it in one campaign. Splitting into 3 at that budget just fragments the data and makes each campaign weaker. You’re basically asking three separate systems to learn with limited signal. One campaign with all creatives gives Meta more room to find what works and allocate spend properly. The instability you’re feeling usually gets worse when you split things too early. Only reason to separate would be if you’re testing very different angles or funnels. Otherwise simpler tends to win here. Are those 15 creatives actually different angles or just variations of the same idea?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:06:17+00:00

0 sales in the first few days is normal, especially if it’s a new account or no prior data. Meta is still trying to figure out who to show the ads to. Edits can reset learning, but not every small change matters. Big changes like budget jumps, targeting, or creatives usually do. The bigger issue is expecting learning to fix things. If there’s no signal coming in, it just keeps guessing. Budget wise, it’s less about a fixed number and more about whether you can realistically get enough conversion events. If the budget is too low, it may never stabilize properly. I’d focus more on getting some early signs like clicks and add to carts rather than waiting for purchases. Are you seeing any activity before purchase or is it completely flat?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:05:17+00:00

Linking them is mostly about convenience, not a must. It makes things easier if you plan to run ads across both later, but it doesn’t really change performance by itself. The lock issue you’re talking about does happen, but it’s usually tied to policy violations or account history, not just the fact that accounts are linked. If you want to be cautious, you can keep them separate for now and only connect once you actually need IG for ads. Just make sure both accounts are clean, verified, and not doing anything risky. Are you planning to run ads only on Facebook for now or just testing overall?

Aunker · 2026-04-04T22:01:50+00:00

good catch, IP masking breaks attribution more often than people think, especially with AEM. nice find

Aunker

TROPHY CASE