| name | campaign-analyzer |
| description | Analyze paid media performance across dimensions, funnels, cohorts, and channels โ turning data into actionable insights and business narratives. |
Process
- Clarify the question โ What specific insight is the user trying to extract? ("Why is CPA rising?" vs "What's the LTV by channel?")
- Select analysis type โ Match the question to the right framework (pulse, strategic, dimensional, funnel, cohort, incrementality, cross-channel)
- Gather required data โ Request exports needed for the analysis
- Run the analysis โ Apply the specific method
- Identify the story โ What happened, why it happened, what to do about it
- Deliver findings โ Structured output with insights, not just metrics
Analysis Type Selector
| Question | Analysis Type | Time Horizon |
|---|
| "Is anything broken right now?" | Daily pulse monitoring | 1-7 days |
| "How are we trending this week/month?" | Weekly/monthly strategic review | 7-30 days |
| "Where is performance coming from/going to?" | Multi-dimensional analysis | 30-90 days |
| "Where are users dropping off?" | Funnel analysis | 7-30 days |
| "How valuable are acquired customers over time?" | Cohort & LTV analysis | 30-365+ days |
| "Is this channel actually driving incremental results?" | Incrementality testing | 30-90 days |
| "How do channels compare and work together?" | Cross-channel analysis | 30-90 days |
Daily Pulse Monitoring
What to check:
- Cost, impressions, clicks, conversions, spend pacing vs budget
- Sudden metric changes (CPC spikes, conversion drops, budget exhaustion)
- Meta: learning phase status per ad set
- Disapprovals, policy flags, payment issues
Alert thresholds: Automated alerts for >20% deviation from 7-day averages on key metrics.
What NOT to do: Don't optimize during daily pulse. Daily review is for catching emergencies, not making strategic changes. Save optimization decisions for weekly reviews.
Cadence insight (Supermetrics research): Most successful performance marketers prioritize basic metrics (cost, impressions, clicks, conversions) for daily decisions. Deeper analysis (frequency, LTV, attribution) is purposeful, not constant.
Weekly/Monthly Strategic Review
Key metrics by platform:
| Google Ads | Meta Ads |
|---|
| CTR, CPC, CPA, ROAS | CPM, CPC, CPA, ROAS |
| Conversion rate | Frequency, Conversion rate |
| Impression share | Reach, Delivery status |
| Quality Score trends | Learning phase status |
| Search term movement | Creative performance |
Review structure:
- Scaling candidates โ Campaigns with strong ROAS + available impression share (Google) or frequency headroom (Meta) โ recommend budget increases
- Pause/pullback candidates โ Campaigns with high CPA + declining trend โ recommend reductions
- Creative performance โ Which ads/creatives are winning, which are fatiguing
- Trend direction โ Is the account improving, stable, or declining over trailing 4 weeks?
Multi-Dimensional Performance Analysis
Slice performance across dimensions to find hidden drivers.
Dimensions to Analyze
| Dimension | What to Look For |
|---|
| Device type | Mobile vs desktop vs tablet CPA/ROAS differences |
| Geography | Regional performance variance (country, state, DMA) |
| Time of day | Hour-by-hour conversion rate patterns |
| Day of week | Day-by-day performance patterns |
| Audience segment | Segment-level CPA/ROAS comparison |
| Match type (Google) | Broad vs phrase vs exact performance |
| Placement (Meta) | Feed vs Stories vs Reels vs Audience Network |
| Creative concept | Concept-level performance patterns |
| Landing page | Landing page-level conversion rate |
| Funnel stage | TOF vs MOF vs BOF performance |
Cross-Tab Analysis
Combine dimensions to find non-obvious patterns:
| Cross-Tab | What It Reveals | Example |
|---|
| Device ร Time of day | When mobile converts vs desktop | Mobile converts 3x better in evening hours |
| Audience ร Creative | Which creatives resonate with which audiences | UGC wins with Lookalike, studio wins with cold broad |
| Geography ร Product | Regional product preferences | Coastal states prefer product A, interior prefer product B |
| Day ร Creative concept | Which concepts work when | Emotional creative wins Sunday, rational wins Tuesday |
| Placement ร Video length | Optimal length per placement | 15s wins Stories, 30s wins Feed |
Red Flags to Watch
- One dimension dominating cost but not conversions โ Budget misallocation
- Large variance across segments โ Opportunity to isolate winners
- Hidden loss leaders โ Specific segments dragging average down
Funnel Analysis
Map every stage from impression to final conversion.
Standard Funnel Stages
| Stage | Metric | Benchmark to Check |
|---|
| Impression | Impressions | Reach sufficient for audience? |
| Click | CTR, clicks | Industry CTR benchmarks |
| Landing page view | Landing page views | Bounce rate, load speed |
| Micro-conversion | AddToCart, video 50%, scroll depth | Stage-specific |
| Macro-conversion | Purchase, Lead, Signup | Target CPA / ROAS |
Calculate stage-by-stage conversion rates. Identify the biggest drop-off points โ that's where to focus optimization.
Drop-Off Diagnostics
| Drop-Off Point | Likely Cause | Fix |
|---|
| Impression โ Click | Low CTR | Ad copy, ad creative, targeting |
| Click โ Landing Page View | Slow page, 404s, disconnected UX | Page speed, fix broken flows |
| Landing Page View โ Add to Cart | Landing page message mismatch, bad UX | Rewrite headlines, improve CTA |
| Add to Cart โ Checkout | Friction, unexpected costs | Simplify checkout, show total costs |
| Checkout โ Purchase | Payment issues, trust concerns | Add trust signals, multiple payment options |
Meta-specific (June 2025): Instant Experience is no longer counted as a landing page view. If your Meta funnel metrics suddenly showed a drop in mid-2025, this is likely why. Adjust funnel definitions accordingly.
Cohort & Lifetime Value Analysis
Cohort Windows
Track customer cohorts at standard intervals:
- Day 1, 7, 14, 30 (short-term retention)
- Day 30, 60, 90 (medium-term)
- Day 180, 365 (long-term LTV)
Metrics to Track per Cohort
| Metric | What It Tells You |
|---|
| Repeat purchase rate | Customer stickiness |
| Average order value over time | Purchase behavior evolution |
| Time to second purchase | Engagement health |
| LTV (revenue per cohort) | True customer value |
| CAC : LTV ratio | Channel/campaign profitability |
LTV by Acquisition Source
Compare LTV by channel, campaign, and audience segment:
| Channel | CPA | 30-day LTV | 90-day LTV | 365-day LTV | LTV:CAC |
|---|
| Google Search (brand) | $45 | $180 | $250 | $380 | 8.4x |
| Meta ASC | $52 | $145 | $210 | $340 | 6.5x |
| Google PMax | $58 | $120 | $180 | $290 | 5.0x |
| Meta Prospecting | $65 | $95 | $150 | $250 | 3.8x |
What this reveals: Channels with higher short-term CPA may still be profitable if LTV is strong. Channels with low CPA but poor LTV are actually expensive.
POAS > ROAS
POAS (Profit On Ad Spend): Gross profit รท ad spend. Better than ROAS for ecommerce because it factors in actual product margin.
Example: $500 ROAS looks great until you learn the product has 8% margin โ true profit is $40 per $100 spent. Another channel at 300% ROAS with 40% margin returns $120 profit per $100 spent.
Implementation: Feed LTV data back into value-based bidding. Use Google's Maximize Conversion Value + tROAS and Meta's ROAS Goal with dynamic conversion values.
Incrementality & Lift Testing
Platform-reported ROAS often overstates channel impact (credit-grabbing from organic demand).
Methods
| Method | How | When |
|---|
| Google Conversion Lift | Holdout test within Google Ads | 2025 update: lower spend/conversion minimums. Can run at campaign level or manager account level |
| Meta Conversion Lift | Holdout group excluded from ads | Need sufficient volume; request via Meta rep |
| Geo-based lift test | Turn off campaigns in specific regions, compare | Need multi-region footprint; works cross-platform |
| MMM (Marketing Mix Modeling) | Statistical model of all channels vs outcomes | Larger budgets; Google's Meridian is open-source |
| Holdout experiments | Target cohort gets no ads, measure difference | Requires first-party audience control |
Questions Incrementality Answers
- "If I turned off YouTube, what happens to non-brand search?"
- "If I turned off Meta prospecting, does total revenue change?"
- "Is brand search capturing demand created by upper-funnel channels?"
- "Are retargeting conversions incremental or would they have happened anyway?"
MMM + incrementality calibration: Google's Meridian (open-source MMM, 2025) combines granular media signals with incrementality calibration. The right way to do cross-channel budget planning at scale.
Cross-Channel Analysis
Marketing Efficiency Ratio (MER)
MER = Total Revenue รท Total Ad Spend (all channels)
- Blended metric. Resilient to attribution changes
- Goal: maintain or improve over time
- Doesn't tell you which channel deserves credit, but tells you overall efficiency
Marginal ROAS
As you increase spend in a channel, each additional dollar produces less return (diminishing returns). The question: at what spend level does marginal ROAS drop below target?
Method:
- Plot spend vs revenue for a channel over 6-12 months
- Fit a diminishing returns curve
- Find the spend level where marginal ROAS = target ROAS
- That's your efficient frontier for that channel
Channel Role Assignment
Not every channel should optimize to the same metric. Assign roles:
| Role | Primary Metric | Example Channels |
|---|
| Awareness | Reach, CPM, Ad Recall Lift | YouTube Demand Gen, Meta Awareness |
| Consideration | CTR, engagement, ViewContent | Meta Prospecting, Google Display |
| Conversion | CPA, ROAS | Google Search Brand, Meta Retargeting |
| Full-funnel scale | MER, blended ROAS | Google PMax, Meta ASC |
2025 Google feature: Import cost data from Meta, TikTok, Pinterest directly into GA4 for cross-platform comparison in one place.
For multi-channel budget reallocation, use the ad-spend-allocator skill.
Output Format
## Campaign Performance Analysis
### Question Analyzed
[Specific question the analysis addresses]
### Data Sources
- [Platforms]
- [Date range]
- [Segments included]
### Key Findings
1. **[Finding 1]** โ [Data point] โ [Why this matters]
2. **[Finding 2]** โ [Data point] โ [Why this matters]
3. **[Finding 3]** โ [Data point] โ [Why this matters]
### Supporting Data
[Tables and metrics supporting findings]
### Narrative
[Story: what happened, why it happened, what to do]
### Recommended Actions
| Priority | Action | Impact | Owner | Timeline |
|----------|--------|--------|-------|----------|
| 1 | [action] | [expected impact] | [who] | [when] |
### Data Confidence & Caveats
- [What the data supports reliably]
- [What needs more information or isn't certain]
Example
Input: "Our ecommerce account's blended ROAS dropped from 3.8x to 2.9x over the last quarter. Google is steady, Meta declined hard. I have 90 days of data by channel, campaign, and creative. Help me figure out what's happening."
Output:
Campaign Performance Analysis
Question Analyzed
Why did blended ROAS decline from 3.8x to 2.9x in Q1 2026, and which channel/campaign/creative drove the decline?
Data Sources
- Google Ads + Meta Ads exports
- 90-day window (JanuaryโMarch 2026)
- Segmented by channel, campaign, creative
Key Findings
- Meta drove 85% of the blended decline โ Google ROAS held at 4.1x (down from 4.2x โ flat). Meta ROAS dropped from 3.5x to 2.1x (-40%). Blended decline is almost entirely Meta
- Meta decline is creative fatigue, not audience or tracking โ Top 3 creatives running 50+ days each. Average creative frequency climbed from 3.1 to 5.8 over 90 days. Meta research: 45% conversion drop at 4+ exposures
- CPM inflation contributed ~15% of Meta decline โ Meta average ad price up 9% in 2025. For this account, CPMs rose from $12.40 to $14.20 (+15%). This is real cost pressure, not just creative failure
- Google is stable because Smart Bidding is managing efficiency โ PMax and Search are both on tROAS with regular n-gram review. No similar discipline on Meta creative
Supporting Data
Channel-level ROAS trend:
| Channel | Jan | Feb | Mar | Change |
|---|
| Google Search | 4.5x | 4.3x | 4.0x | -11% |
| Google PMax | 3.8x | 3.9x | 4.1x | +8% |
| Google blended | 4.2x | 4.1x | 4.1x | -2% |
| Meta ASC | 3.6x | 2.9x | 2.2x | -39% |
| Meta Retargeting | 5.2x | 3.8x | 2.4x | -54% |
| Meta blended | 3.5x | 2.8x | 2.1x | -40% |
| Blended total | 3.8x | 3.2x | 2.9x | -24% |
Meta creative frequency trend:
| Creative | Jan freq | Feb freq | Mar freq | Status |
|---|
| Creative A (static) | 2.8 | 4.5 | 6.2 | Severely fatigued |
| Creative B (video) | 3.2 | 5.1 | 6.8 | Severely fatigued |
| Creative C (carousel) | 2.9 | 4.2 | 5.4 | Fatigued |
| Creative D (UGC video) | 1.8 | 2.4 | 3.1 | Healthy (recent addition) |
Narrative
Your blended ROAS decline is a Meta creative fatigue story with a CPM inflation chaser. Google is fine โ Smart Bidding + disciplined n-gram review keeps it healthy. On Meta, you've run the same 3 creatives for 50+ days, frequency is at 5.8 across top creatives, and Meta's research shows 45% conversion rate drop at 4+ exposures. Meta's CPM increase (+9% industry-wide in 2025, +15% for your account) adds background pressure but is secondary โ even at old CPMs, fatigue would still be dragging ROAS.
The silver lining: your one recent creative addition (D โ UGC video, frequency 3.1) is performing well. This is the signal that creative rotation works for your audience; you just haven't been doing it.
Recommended Actions
| Priority | Action | Impact | Owner | Timeline |
|---|
| 1 | Pause Creative A and B (highest frequency). Launch 6 new variants (3 UGC video, 3 static) | Restore Meta ROAS toward 3.0x+ | Media buyer + creative | Week 1 |
| 2 | Build weekly creative rotation pipeline โ minimum 4 new variants per week | Prevent fatigue recurrence | Creative team | Ongoing |
| 3 | Add Meta frequency automation rule โ pause creatives at freq >5 | Automated fatigue protection | Media buyer | Week 1 |
| 4 | Reprice remaining Meta budget against new CPM reality โ may need 10-15% budget increase to maintain same volume | Offset CPM inflation | Finance + media buyer | Week 2 |
| 5 | Replicate Google's n-gram discipline for Meta placement/creative reviews | Build sustainable Meta process | Media buyer | Ongoing |
Data Confidence & Caveats
- High confidence: Creative fatigue is the primary driver. Frequency data, ROAS decline timing, and the Creative D performance all point to the same conclusion
- Medium confidence: CPM inflation contribution (~15%) is a rough estimate based on industry averages; your specific CPM trend confirms it's real but the exact split with creative fatigue can't be precisely calculated without an A/B test
- Untested: Incrementality โ platform-reported ROAS may overstate true channel impact. Consider running a Meta Conversion Lift test in Q2 to validate blended ROAS represents actual business lift
- Not included: LTV analysis โ if Meta retargeting has higher LTV, the CPA increase may be tolerable. Recommend 90-day LTV analysis as follow-up
- Use the meta-ads-creative-engine skill for creative testing framework implementation
- Use the ad-spend-allocator skill for cross-channel budget reallocation after creative rotation stabilizes
Guidelines
- Don't confuse correlation with causation. Two trends moving together (ROAS down, frequency up) correlate. To confirm causation, test the intervention (refresh creative, see if ROAS recovers).
- Don't analyze without a question. "Tell me about the account" produces vanity dashboards. "Why did CPA rise in March?" produces insight. Always start with the specific question.
- Don't ignore base rates. An account with 10 conversions/day has huge daily variance. A change that looks significant may be noise. Require statistical meaningfulness (50+ conversions per segment for reliable segment analysis).
- Don't overweight platform-reported ROAS. Both Google and Meta take credit for conversions that may have happened anyway. For strategic decisions, triangulate platform ROAS with MER, incrementality, and LTV.
- Don't report metrics without narrative. "CPA is $62" is data. "CPA rose from $48 to $62 because creative fatigue hit in mid-February, same period frequency exceeded 4, confirmed by Creative D's outperformance proving rotation works" is insight. Insight drives action.
- Don't skip segmentation. Account averages hide winning and losing segments. Always break down by device, geo, audience, creative, placement. Hidden patterns drive hidden wins.
- Meta Instant Experience change (June 2025): No longer counts as a landing page view. If Meta funnel metrics look broken mid-2025, this is why.
- Meta attribution API change (October 2025):
7d_view and 28d_view windows removed from Insights API. Reports pulling these need updates.
- Don't overreact to a single week. Weekly variance is normal. Look for 2+ week trends before declaring changes.
- Cross-references: For Google-specific optimization actions, use the google-ads-optimizer skill. For Meta-specific optimization, use the meta-ads-optimizer skill. For creative testing frameworks, use the meta-ads-creative-engine skill. For cross-channel budget reallocation, use the ad-spend-allocator skill. For reporting the analysis to stakeholders, use the paid-media-reporter skill. For full audits, use google-ads-audit or meta-ads-audit.
- Confidence: Channel attribution is inherently imperfect. All multi-touch attribution models make assumptions. State what the data supports clearly and what requires incrementality testing to confirm.