forWeston Funding
Meta Ads Report · Q3 2026

14 leads at $112 each.

Over Q3 2026, Meta delivered 14 leads at a blended $112. NZ 01 - Website Leads - Austin carried it at $68 per lead.

14
Leads
down 83% vs prior quarter
$112
Cost per lead
up 42% vs prior quarter
$1,786
Meta spend
down 77% vs prior quarter
$68
Best campaign
Lowest cost per lead
Leads are conversions recorded on the website by the Meta pixel. Blended cost per lead covers the lead campaigns; awareness spend is shown separately and excluded.
The story

The quarter in three moves.

We lead with the result, then show how the campaigns and creative produced it.

01
$68

NZ 01 - Website Leads - Austin is the engine

Lowest cost per lead at $68. Same creative, best economics, so budget stays weighted here.

02
13

One creative carries

"6/11 - [Page Post] Video - We…" drove 13 leads at about $94 each. The message that is landing.

03
4

Diversified sources

4 lead campaigns contributed, so results do not rely on a single audience.

Meta Ads

Where the leads came from.

Daily volume and cost, then the campaign and creative behind it. Awareness spend is tracked separately and excluded from cost per lead.

Leads & spend per week

Leads Weekly spend
Window total 14 leadsShaded band = the current 13 weeks, the bars before them are the previous period
i
Delivery stopped on 2026-07-22. The 70 days since then carry no spend, so the figures above describe the flight that ran, not a full quarter. Nothing was under-delivering at the end; the campaigns simply stopped.
CampaignSpendLeadsCost / leadConv. rateCTRCPC
NZ 01 - Website Leads - Houston
$5415$1085.5%2.9%$3.42
NZ 01 - Website Leads - DFW
$4483$1494.8%2.8%$3.22
NZ 01 - Website Leads - Austin Best CPL
$3385$687.2%2.5%$2.86
NZ 01 - Website Leads - San Antonio
$2421$2422.1%2.5%$2.60
NZ 01 - IG Profile Visits Engagement$2180n/an/a3.2%$0.42
Blended lead total$1,56814$1125.2%--

Top-performing creative

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. 23 creatives carried spend this period and none of them were new.

Who the leads come from

Leads by age & gender

Where the leads concentrate. Lead campaigns only.

MenWomen
25-34235-44245-54355-64465+3

Leads by placement

Bar length is leads; the label shows cost per lead. Lead campaigns only.

Facebook feed12 · $74 costInstagram Stories1 · $70 costFacebook Stories1 · $69 costInstagram feed0 · $279 spentInstagram Reels0 · $257 spent
i
Who the leads are coming from. Of the 14 leads with a demographic on file, 11 (79%) came from men and 10 (71%) from the 45-and-over brackets. Measured on the lead campaigns only; the individual age and gender cells are small, so read this as where demand concentrates, not a targeting verdict.
→
Placement is sorting the spend. Facebook feed delivered the cheapest lead at $74 (12 on $893); Instagram feed spent $279 with no lead attributed, a candidate to switch off. Measured on the lead campaigns only.
What's next

Where we take it from here.

Each move ties back to what this window proved.

Primary move

Scale the winners, fix what is expensive.

We weight budget toward the lowest cost per lead and the winning creative while holding the expensive segments to prove their CPL can come down.

What we do
Step up the best audience and creative.
Evidence
$68 on the best segment.
Risk
CPL can drift as we scale; we cap increments.
We need
Your read on lead quality by segment.
Operating plan

The next window.

  • Build variations of the winning creative so results do not lean on one asset.
  • Cut or fix the segments running above target CPL.
  • Review lead quality together so we optimize toward closed deals, not just form fills.
The next chapter

Now we scale it.

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