Background
A leading brand in a competitive industry with strong user acquisition (UA) processes and a global budget experienced stagnant growth due to market competition. They struggled with rising costs and squeezing margins, sought ways to optimize ad spending for better ROI, and navigated the ever-evolving data privacy landscape. With a complex marketing infrastructure, they needed a solution that would integrate seamlessly. They saw AIM (Always-On Incremental Measurement) as a possible solution.
Test Objective
The test’s primary goal was to evaluate AIM’s efficacy in improving sales. Additionally, the objective was to determine how seamlessly AIM could integrate with and amplify
the client’s established UA workflows.
Test Conditions
- Duration: 13 weeks observational & 13 weeks AIM active
- Test Data and Region: Acquisitions from both iOS and Android, in the U.S. market.
- Acquisition Definition: A new user making their first purchase. Media Sources: 11 digital media channels were utilized,
encompassing self-attributing networks and traditional networks. - Metrics of Success: The yardstick for measuring success
was “Total New User Sales,” which incorporated both organic and paid media acquisitions. - Data Authenticity: The data (Total New User Sales) provided was the ground truth, neither measured by the client’s mobile measurement partner (AppsFlyer) nor AIM, ensuring its raw and unfiltered nature.
- Verification: This data representation allows the client to validate any increases or decrements in total new user sales.
Test Results
Summary
| Test Phase | Total Sales | Ad Spend | Average CPA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Business-as-Usual(Weeks 1-13) | 36,331units per week | $1,091,848 | $30.08 |
| AIM Period(Weeks 14-25) | 40,431units per week | $1,094,761 | $26.58 |
| AIM Impact | 4,100 Units | 0.3% | 11.62% |
1. Total Sales:
- Business-as-Usual (Weeks 1-13):
Average Sales: 36,331 units per week. - AIM Period (Weeks 14-25):
Average Sales: 40,431 units per week. - Difference: There was an increase in the average weekly sales by 4,100 units. This represents an 11.3% growth during the AIM period in comparison to the Business-as-Usual period.
2. Ad Spend:
- Business-as-Usual (Weeks 1-13):
Average Ad Spend: $1,091,848. - AIM Period (Weeks 14-25):
Average Ad Spend: $1,094,761. - Difference: The average ad spend during the AIM weeks increased marginally by $2,913. This is just a 0.3% rise. Notably, even with this minor increment in ad expenditure, the AIM period experienced a remarkable uptick in sales.
Total CPA (Cost Per Acquisition):
- Business-as-Usual (Weeks 1-13):
Average CPA: $30.08 - AIM Period (Weeks 14-25):
Average CPA: $26.58 - Difference: The AIM period exhibited a reduction in the average weekly CPA by $3.50, marking an 11.62% decrease. This detailed insight underscores that not only did the AIM strategy elevate sales, but it accomplished this more cost-effectively.
Observations
The AIM methodology stands out in its ability to elevate performance. It’s impressive to note that sales grew by 11.3% with just a 0.3% increase in ad spending.
The reduction in CPA is also a testament to AIM’s efficiency. The 11.62% decrease in CPA during the AIM period relative to the Business-as-Usual weeks suggests better targeting and higher returns on advertising spend.
In Conclusion: Analyzing the data with precision reinforces the superiority of AIM in boosting sales and refining advertising efficacy. Minimal fluctuations in ad spending coupled with tangible results in total sales and a pronounced reduction in CPA showcase AIM’s strategic significance in this scenario.