Measuring the return on UGC is harder than dashboards suggest, because the same video works in several places at once: in ads, on the product page and in emails. Attribution assigns it to one channel and is wrong almost every time.

The three numbers that actually count

  1. Cost per acquisition of the campaign using the video, compared with the same campaign before. An imperfect comparison but a readable one.
  2. Product page conversion rate with and without video, measured over at least two weeks per side.
  3. Total revenue against total ad spend for the month. That number does not depend on any attribution model.

Why attribution lies

Someone sees the video on TikTok, searches the brand on Google two days later and buys. The dashboard assigns the sale to search. That is not a technical error, it is the limit of the model. This is why a before and after comparison across a whole period is more reliable than per channel allocation.

The simplest test that works

Move one variable only. Two weeks with the old creative, two with the new one, same budget, same offer, same audience. The difference in cost per acquisition is your data, and it is sturdier than any model.

The cost nobody counts

Internal time. Brief, approvals, revisions and uploading cost more than the video in many Spanish companies. Removing one approval round improves return more than negotiating a discount with the creator.

How to tell whether a video works

Not by the comments. Effective ad content often has mediocre engagement and good sales, because it is not made to be liked but to convince.

Keep reading

Find creators and measure the result →

Frequently asked questions

Which metric should I read first?

Cost per acquisition, before and after.

Do likes matter?

No, they do not correlate with sales.

How long is a valid test?

Two weeks per variant.

Which number is the most honest?

Total revenue against total ad spend.