Are your campaign benchmarks even useful? comparing against industry standards vs. your own baseline

Кейсы и истории успеха
1

We’ve been using industry benchmarks for ages to evaluate campaign performance. Like, we look at average CTR for our sector, average conversion rate, average ROAS, and then we see how we stack up. Sounds logical, right?

But I’ve been noticing something: those benchmarks are kind of useless for us. We’re in a niche product category with a specific audience type, and the “industry average” is pulling data from everything from mass-market campaigns to hyper-targeted ones. We’d benchmark against companies that are doing $50M in annual ad spend when we’re at $5M. Obviously we’re going to look bad.

The wake-up call was when we compared our performance to companies similar to us—same size, same category, same geographic focus—and suddenly we looked normal. Some benchmarks we actually beat. That changed how I think about goal-setting.

I started digging into this more systematically. The question became: what benchmarks actually matter? Is it industry segment? Is it company size? Is it product category? Is it whether you’re DTC or B2B? Or is the real benchmark just “how did we perform last quarter.”

Now we use a mix: we track our own historical performance (quarter-over-quarter), we benchmark against competitors we respect (not against broad “industry averages”), and we set goals based on what we know is achievable for our specific business model. It’s less sexy than saying “we crushed industry benchmarks,” but it’s way more honest.

What’s tricky for us is that we work across Russian and US markets, and the benchmarks are so different. Average influencer rates, engagement expectations, cost of media—it’s a completely different playbook. Using the same benchmark framework for both markets doesn’t make sense.

How do you decide what benchmarks to trust? Are you digging deep into who’s in the benchmark dataset, or are you just taking the broad numbers at face value? And how do you set realistic goals when you’re operating across multiple markets?

2

Отличный пост! Ты попал на совсем болезненную точку. Я видела, как много компаний зацикляются на «beating industry benchmarks» и при этом теряют из виду реальную картину своего бизнеса.

Согласна, что это особенно сложно, когда работаешь между рынками. Русский и американский маркетинг—это практически разные миры. То, что нормально для US, может быть совсем не нормально для Russia.

Мне нравится твой подход к использованию собственного baseline. Это позволяет команде фокусироваться на реальном прогрессе, а не на абстрактном сравнении.

Гово́ря более практически: я часть своей работы—это помощь брендам в выборе правильных инфлюенсеров. И я часто слышу, как они ставят недостижимые goals, потому что слепо верят в benchmark. Потом инфлюенсер в их тапе не может их достичь, отношения портятся. Если бы они больше смотрели на исторические данные своих же кампаний, было бы проще.

А насчет кросс-bordер сравнении—может быть, имеет смысл создать отдельные бенчмарки для Russia и for US? Просто техническая идея.

3

Ты прав, и я бы еще добавила одно: мало людей проверяют, на каком сегменте аудитории построен benchmark.

Например, возьми benchmark CTR для e-commerce. Звучит просто. Но если в этом benchmark 70% данных от luxury sector (где аудитория холоднее и CTR ниже), а ты работаешь в fast-moving consumer goods (где CTR выше), ты по умолчанию будешь выглядеть лучше. Или наоборот.

Мой совет: если ты используешь external benchmark, всегда спроси себе:

  1. Какой sample size? (бенчмарк на 100 кампаниях vs. 10000 кампаниях это совсем разные вещи)
  2. Какого периода данные? (онлайн-маркетинг меняется быстро, benchmark за 2023 уже может быть неслучайным)
  3. На каких платформах был собран этот benchmark?
  4. Какой средний бюджет кампаний? (маленькие бюджеты часто показывают лучше % ROI)

Для кросс-bordер работы: я бы вообще рекомендовала забыть про общие benchmarks и работать с конкретной локализацией. Для Russia есть свои инструменты аналитики (Яндекс.Метрика, например), для US—Google Analytics. Даже сами метрики отличаются.

Мой рабочий flow: я беру свои кампании за последние 8 кварталов, анализирую тренды (улучшается ли CTR или стагнирует?), и вот это мой реальный benchmark. На этот baseline я и ставлю goals. Это намного более honest и achievable.

Как ты сейчас нормализуешь данные между двумя рынками при анализе?

4

Спасибо за этот пост! Я на 100% согласен. Когда я смотрю на benchmarks для tech startups, я вижу все: от Uber до маленькой SaaS компании. Это как если бы сравнивать себя со всеми в одной комнате.

Для нас (мы tech стартап, выходим на новые рынки) benchmark вообще не имеет смысла, потому что мы уникальны. Наша аудитория, наш продукт, наш рынок—все очень specific. Когда я говорю инвесторам о performance, я просто показываю, как мы растем quarter-over-quarter. Это честнее.

А кросс-bordер вопрос для нас боль тоже. В Russia мы работали с местными инфлюенсерами, стоили дешево, результаты были хорошими. Когда мы перешли на US, цены выпрыгнули в 2-3 раза, и я не могу сравнивать апples-to-apples. Было бы полезно понять, есть ли структурированный способ нормализовать эти данные.

Твой подход звучит sensible. Как ты это оформляешь? У тебя есть даш или документ, где ты храниш исторические бенчмарки?

5

This is the reality check nobody wants to hear. Industry benchmarks are marketing collateral—they make people feel good when they beat them, and they’re easy to sell. But they’re not strategy.

I work with brands across 5-6 different verticals, and what I’ve learned is this: the only useful benchmark is the one that maps to your specific business model. Are you competing on brand awareness (top-of-funnel metrics matter most) or bottom-funnel conversion (efficiency metrics matter)? Are you CAC-constrained or ROAS-constrained? Those questions matter more than any industry average.

Here’s my operational shift: instead of external benchmarks, I create peer cohorts. Find 5-10 competitors who are similar to you (same size, same channel strategy, same audience type), track their public-facing metrics (what they claim in case studies, etc.), and that’s your peer benchmark. Then beat those specific people.

For cross-border scaling, this gets even more critical. The cost structure in Russia vs. US is so fundamentally different that any broad benchmark is useless. I actually build separate benchmark models for each market:

  • Russia: lower media costs, higher engagement expectations on some platforms (TikTok, VK)
  • US: higher media costs, lower engagement rates on some channels but higher conversion rates

Then I optimize within each market’s constraints, rather than trying to hit the same targets across both.

One tactical thing: I’d also recommend building a goal-setting framework tied to your business objectives, not benchmarks. Start with, “We need X revenue this quarter.” Then work backward: What conversion rate gets us there? What traffic volume? What CAC can we afford? Then you benchmark against achievable parameters.

How are you currently setting quarterly targets? Are they benchmark-based, or are they tied to business goals?

6

From the creator side, I see this differently, but I think you’re onto something important. When brands I work with are benchmarked against “industry standard” influencer rates, they sometimes massively undervalue the creators they work with. Or they expect unrealistic performance because the benchmark says “creators in this niche average 5% engagement.”

Your observation about cohort benchmarking is smart. If you’re working with specific creators, their historical performance might be more relevant than the broad average. Like, an influencer who averaged 8% engagement with your brand last quarter is a better predictor of next quarter than a general benchmark saying “influencers in this category average 4% engagement.”

Also, from a creator perspective, cross-market benchmarking matters because audiences are so different. A US-based creator has a completely different dynamic than a Russian creator, even if they’re the same follower count. Audience maturity, platform literacy, economic purchasing power—everything is different.

I think what you’re saying is basically: “Trust your data more than the hype.” That’s solid. Though I’d add: also talk to the creators themselves. We often see patterns in what works that don’t show up in the raw numbers.

Do you share benchmarks with creators, or is that internal only?

7

Exactly right. Let me add a layer: the problem with industry benchmarks isn’t just that they’re imprecise; it’s that they’re lagging indicators. They tell you where the market was, not where it’s going.

Here’s what I’d do instead: build a competitive monitoring system. Track 8-10 competitors (or peer companies) quarterly. Document their media spend patterns, estimated traffic, estimated CAC, conversion rate proxies (based on public signals). This gives you a dynamic benchmark that updates with market conditions.

For cross-market benchmarking specifically, I’d go further: build a market-specific efficiency model. For Russia: what’s the baseline media cost (CPM), what’s the baseline influencer rate, what’s the expected engagement rate by platform, what’s the conversion rate by device type. Do the same for US. Don’t try to jam them into the same framework.

Then, when you evaluate a campaign, you ask: “Are we beating the Russia-specific model, or the US-specific model?” That tells you if underperformance is due to execution or market conditions.

One more thing: I’d separate performance benchmarks from operational benchmarks. Performance benchmarks (CTR, conversion rate, ROAS) are what you use to measure success. Operational benchmarks (cost per asset, time to campaign launch, creative turnaround) tell you if your process is efficient. Most teams conflate these two, which makes goal-setting a mess.

For goal-setting: I use a constraint-based framework. Start with your business constraint (usually CAC or ROAS). Then map back: what traffic volume do you need, what conversion rate achieves that, what CTR gets you that traffic? That’s your target, not a benchmark.

What’s your top business constraint right now—are you CAC-limited, ROAS-limited, or volume-limited?