A US windows and doors installation company spending $60k a month on Meta had the creative assets and the market demand. What it lacked was focus. A structured consolidation and scaling approach fixed the account and doubled monthly spend over eight months.
CPL had drifted to $170. Cost-per-demo was above the $750 target. The set rate, the share of leads that booked a sales appointment, had fallen to around 18%. On paper, volume looked acceptable.
Underneath, too many campaigns were competing with each other. Budgets were spread across unvalidated geographies. The best creatives had been running long enough that frequency was quietly eroding performance. Nobody had applied a consistent framework to decide what stays on and what comes off.
The account kept growing horizontally: more campaigns, more adsets, more markets. What it needed was the vertical discipline of cutting what wasn't earning its budget.
Three problems running at once: inflated CPL, falling set rate, and a 23% duplicate lead rate that made everything look better than it was.
Every strategic move came from the data already in the account. No new campaigns launched until the existing structure was cleaned up and the budget freed from underperformers had somewhere productive to go.
The data had already identified what worked. The strategy was to stop running underperforming ads alongside the winners and use the freed budget to run a structured copy test on top of them.
CPL dropped from $170 to $127 in the first two months, then to $105 by month eight. Set rate recovered from 18% to around 28% as lead quality improved alongside targeting precision. For the client's sales team, the shift was felt before it was fully measured: fewer calls that went nowhere, more homeowners who were in-area and expecting a callback.