Testing creatives just for the sake of testing?
I still see companies testing creatives just for the sake of testing 🤦♂️
What’s the point of spending +60% of your budget on creative testing if you are not reserving money to feed the winners from these tests?
Having one evergreen/BAU ad group with 10 winners and $500/day while you upload one testing ad group with a new concept and $200/day twice or 3 times a week is not efficient.
You will likely have 2-3 winners max on your BAU absorbing the whole budget while you waste a bunch of potential winners. The framework I shared is only useful/efficient if you really focus on feeding the winners! If you start to accumulate winners that never get spend, then it’s time to create more BAUs rather thank keep spending on new testing ad groups!
This framework is fully flexible because it allows you to scale as fast as you want within your budget constraints but you need to use it with logic!
👉 You have big pockets? Good, then you can have multiple BAUs and multiple testing ad groups (and brag about testing +1M creatives a week if you want on LinkedIn 😂 )
👉 You have small ones? then focus on nurturing your BAU and go slower with the testing
The important point here is that you need to reserve most of your gasoline for the creatives that really fire up your growth engine, not the other way around! ⛽ 🔥
