forEcoView Windows DFWOver Sep 12 - Oct 11, 2026, Meta produced 59 booked sales appointments from 358 leads registered in the CRM, a 16% set rate, at $640 per appointment.
We lead with the result, then show how the campaigns and creative produced it.
Lowest cost per lead at $67. Same creative, best economics, so budget stays weighted here.
"04/03 - EV_Before and After_v1…" drove 111 leads at about $64 each. The message that is landing.
4 lead campaigns contributed, so results do not rely on a single audience.
Daily volume and cost, then the campaign and creative behind it. Awareness spend is tracked separately and excluded from cost per lead.
| Campaign | Spend | Leads | Cost / lead | Conv. rate | CTR | CPC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
NZ 01 - Austin Best Performers Form | $13,209 | 89 | $148 | 3.9% | 1.7% | $4.02 |
NZ 01 - DFW Form Best CPL | $9,098 | 136 | $67 | 3.1% | 2.5% | $1.51 |
NZ 01 - DFW Best Performers Form | $8,340 | 94 | $89 | 6.4% | 2.1% | $3.84 |
NZ 01 - Waco/Temple Form | $7,104 | 29 | $245 | 1.5% | 2.3% | $2.70 |
| Blended lead total | $37,751 | 348 | $108 | 3.5% | - | - |
Hook rate is the share of people shown the ad who stayed past 3 seconds. Hold rate is the share of those who kept watching to ThruPlay, 15 seconds or the end. 93 creatives carried spend this period and 38 of them went live inside it.
#1$64 / lead
#2$132 / lead
#3$78 / leadWhere the leads concentrate. Lead campaigns only.
Bar length is leads; the label shows cost per lead. Lead campaigns only.
Daily conversions against daily spend across the window.
Spend and conversions by campaign. Brand search is separated so the true acquisition cost stays visible.
| Campaign | Status | Spend | Conv. | Cost / conv. | CTR |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NZ - Search - Core - DFW | Active | $7,469 | 31 | $241 | 3.3% |
| NZ - Search - Austin | Active | $3,618 | 13 | $278 | 2.7% |
| NZ - Search - Brand - DFW | Active | $1,044 | 8 | $131 | 19.7% |
| NZ - Search - Waco/Temple | Active | $779 | 3 | $260 | 3.1% |
| NZ - Search - Window Types - Austin | Active | $562 | 0 | n/a | 3.3% |
| NZ - Search - Window Types - Waco | Active | $429 | 0 | n/a | 4.5% |
| NZ - Search - Window Types - DFW | Active | $367 | 2 | $184 | 4.3% |
| Total | $14,268 | 57 | $251 | - |
Every call these ads produced and what became of it, measured on the call itself rather than on the ad platform. Google can see that a call started; this is how it ended. These counts will not tie exactly to the conversion table above, and they are not meant to: Google dates a call to the day the ad was clicked and waits a day for the data, so the same calls land on slightly different days in the two views.
| What happened to the call | Calls | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reached someone | 60 | 100% |
Platform leads are only the start. This is what happened next in the CRM (MarketSharp) over the same window: how many became a booked sales appointment, and how many have sold. Meta forms land fully tracked; Google runs mostly on phone calls, which are still being connected to the campaigns.
Meta lead forms that landed in MarketSharp.
16% of leads booked a sales presentation this window.
Deals that closed in the window; more of the appointments are still working through.
Forms tagged as the Google landing-page source, after removing test/QA submissions.
Google Ads drove 40 tracked phone calls this window, 24 of them 60 seconds or longer. Calls are matched to Google by click ID, so this includes calls placed from the landing pages, not just the ad call button. Answered calls only. These already feed Google Ads bidding.
| Channel | Leads in CRM | Appts set | Sold | Set rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Meta · Facebook / Instagram | 358 | 59 | 11 | 16% |
| 29 | 9* | —* | phone* |
Each move ties back to what this window proved.
We push the proven audiences and creative, fix what is expensive, and bring you a fresh read each window. Tell us how the leads land in your pipeline.
Talk through the plan