Happy Monday!

So I’m sure you’ve read that split testing is the key to success. But there is an efficient way to split test and an inefficient way to split test, especially when we’re talking about a large # of ads. This post is geared towards advertisers who are on a budget: $20/day, $50/day $100/day, whatever it is.

Here’s a typical scenario: you’re feeling inspired and decide to upload 100 ads (25 images, 4 headlines) for your campaign that is set to a $50/day budget. They say that ~20,000 impressions is a good indicator for future performance. Only problem is, at a $0.50 CPM, properly testing 100 ads in parallel would cost you $1000 & 20 days worth of testing. Can you afford to risk $1000 and 20 days to test 100 ads in ONE campaign?

A better way is to submit all ads, get them approved but test them in a serial fashion. Out of your 100 ads, test 5 at a time & pause the rest. 5 ads at 20,000 impressions each at $0.50 CPM = $50 (which is coincidentally, our daily budget). You get the results from your 5 and then move onto the next batch and so on and so forth. So this way, if you do find a winner, you’ll end up making a bit of money while testing.

Better yet, the winning creative(s) should influence you to determine which 5 ads you should test next (take note of the winning headline, body text and any characteristics of the image). Maybe it’s a picture of a guy who’s wearing an apron to suggest that he cooks, well look for other guys in aprons or guys wearing stuff that suggests he does chores (rubber cleaning gloves, sponge, vacuum etc).

Now if your target demographic is small and you’re unable to spend $100/day in it, then a lower # of impressions would be acceptable. Instead of 20,000, try 10,000 and so forth but 5 creatives at a time is a good rule of thumb.

Hope this helps!

Ben