I’m finding it frustrating to keep presenting downloads and impressions as proof to stakeholders.
What actual metrics are you using to demonstrate the connection between marketing spend and real revenue? I want to go deeper than the standard metrics.
CAC to LTV ratio is what actually matters. If you spend $50 to get a user who brings in $200 over 12 months, you have clear profit to show. Track your cohorts monthly to see what each user group earned from different campaigns. This provides a direct line from ad spend to revenue. The payback period seals the deal. For example, if campaign X pays for itself in 45 days and campaign Y takes 90 days, that makes it an easy story to tell.
I track cost per paying user, not total users.
Campaigns look great until you see half the users never buy anything. I only measure what each dollar brings in from actual buyers.
Makes it dead obvious which campaigns work and which just attract freeloaders.
I track users through the whole funnel with revenue attribution tags. Someone hits my Facebook campaign A? I can see exactly what they spent in months 1, 3, and 6.
The game changer was fixing my attribution windows. Most people quit at 7 days - I go 30 days minimum for apps. Users convert weeks after that first click all the time.
I also pull negative cohorts now - users who cost more than they’ll ever make back. Killed three campaigns that looked great on surface metrics but were just bleeding money.
Revenue attribution wins every time when you’re talking to finance.
Focus on revenue per dollar spent. It shows real impact.