Prop Firm · Channel Economics
How Google and Meta performed differently inside a $3M+ acquisition program
We didn't expect Google and Meta to produce the same ROAS — and they didn't. Google captured existing intent; Meta created and discovered demand. Read in isolation, Meta's ROAS looks weak. Read in context, both channels earned their place.
The starting situation
The client ran a substantial program across Google and Meta and wanted to understand which channel to lean into. The temptation was to judge both against the same ROAS target and cut whichever looked weaker.
The real problem
Google and Meta do different jobs. Google meets demand that already exists; Meta creates and discovers it. Holding them to an identical ROAS target would have meant cutting the channel that was building future demand — and quietly shrinking the top of the funnel.
What the data showed
- Google carried the majority of revenue at a high ROAS — the expected pattern for intent capture.
- Meta's ROAS was lower in isolation, but it was reaching audiences Google's intent-based model never would.
- Blended economics were strong; judging each channel only on its own ROAS would have misrepresented the program.
What we changed
Channel-level measurement
Each channel was measured on its own contribution, then read against the blended economics rather than a single target.
Different jobs, different targets
Google was managed for intent capture efficiency; Meta for demand creation and reach — with targets that matched each role.
Blended-economics decisions
Budget decisions were made on the program's blended profitability, not on penalizing the demand-creation channel for a lower ROAS.
Results
Figures drawn from the client's combined reporting. Identifying information has been removed for confidentiality.
Google and Meta don't need the same ROAS to both be useful.
A lower platform ROAS doesn't automatically make a channel worth cutting. Google captured existing intent; Meta created demand that fed the rest of the funnel. Channel-level ROAS has to be read in context — blended economics are what decide whether the program works.