I’ve been running influencer campaigns in both LATAM and the US for about two years now, and I keep running into the same wall: the metrics that look solid in one market completely fall apart in the other. Like, a campaign that delivers 3.2% engagement in Mexico gets me excited, but when I apply that same benchmark to a US audience, suddenly it feels mediocre.
The problem is I don’t have a clear framework for translating success between these markets. LATAM audiences engage differently—they’re more community-driven, more likely to comment and share. US audiences? They’re more filtered, more selective about what they interact with. But both are valuable.
I’ve started collecting case studies from both regions to build my own benchmark library, but I’m realizing I need to actually understand why the numbers differ, not just accept that they do. Is it audience psychology? Algorithm differences? Creator style? All of the above?
For those of you working cross-market, how are you actually handling ROI comparison? Are you adjusting your benchmarks by market, or are you building separate performance frameworks entirely? And more importantly—when you’re pitching these campaigns to brands, how do you explain why a 2.8% engagement rate in Argentina isn’t a failure, but actually solid performance for that specific market?
This is such a crucial conversation! I love that you’re thinking about this systematically. From my experience connecting brands with creators across both markets, I’ve seen that the narrative around metrics matters as much as the numbers themselves.
What I mean is: when I introduce a brand to a LATAM creator, I always lead with community strength and authenticity signals—comments quality, share rates, DM engagement. With US creators, brands want to see conversion rates and traffic attribution first. Same creator, different story.
I’d suggest building your case studies around market-specific value propositions rather than trying to homogenize the metrics. Show the brand what success looks like in each market—LATAM might be ‘passionate community building,’ while US is ‘efficient conversion.’ Both are wins; they just look different on a spreadsheet.
Would love to connect you with some creators I work with in both regions who’ve successfully scaled across markets. They might have direct insights into how audiences actually respond.
Honestly, the best partnerships I’ve facilitated are between brands and creators who get this nuance. One brand I work with realized that their LATAM influencer roster needed to be more focused on storytelling and community dialogue, while their US roster thrived on quick, snappy product demonstrations. Same brand, totally different creative approaches, but both drove real results.
The key is educating your brand partners early. When they understand that metrics are culturally contextual, not universal, the conversations become way less tense.
You’re touching on something I’ve been digging into as well. Let me share some actual numbers from campaigns I’ve analyzed:
LATAM markets (specifically Mexico, Brazil, Colombia):
- Average engagement rate: 3.5-5.2% (higher baseline)
- Comment-to-like ratio: 1:8 to 1:12
- Share rate as % of impressions: 0.8-1.2%
- Conversion lag: 7-14 days post-post
US markets:
- Average engagement rate: 1.8-2.8% (lower baseline, but more targeted)
- Comment-to-like ratio: 1:15 to 1:25
- Share rate: 0.3-0.6%
- Conversion lag: 24-48 hours
The why behind these differences matters. LATAM social media culture is inherently more participatory—people treat it like a community space. US audiences are more transactional, more cynical about sponsored content. This affects ROI calculation completely.
My recommendation: Don’t compare raw engagement rates. Instead, normalize by audience intent. Calculate cost-per-engaged-community-member in LATAM, and cost-per-qualified-lead in the US. Suddenly your benchmarks make sense cross-market.
Have you segmented your data by creator tier (macro vs. micro) within each market? That’s where I found the biggest ROI variations.
One more thing—time zone and posting cadence play a huge role that nobody talks about. LATAM creators often see peak engagement 8-12 hours after posting (when US audiences wake up). US creators compress their engagement window to 2-4 hours. If you’re measuring ROI on the same timeline, you’ll miss LATAM’s real impact.
Real talk: most brands don’t actually care about perfectly comparable benchmarks. They care about consistent returns on their specific investment.
What I’ve built with my agency is a tiered benchmark system:
Tier 1: Macro creators (1M+) - set expectations at market baseline (so LATAM gets 3.5%+ engagement target, US gets 2.2%)
Tier 2: Micro (100K-1M) - both markets converge closer (2.8-3.2% range)
Tier 3: Nano (10K-100K) - LATAM actually slightly underperforms macro (2.5-3%), US catches up (2.6-3%)
This tells a story to brands: smaller creators are more efficient in the US but less differentiated in LATAM. Adjust strategy accordingly.
The campaigns with the best ROI across both markets? The ones where we let the creator’s native instinct drive content, but we aligned on one clear metric upfront—ours is usually cost-per-conversion or cost-per-qualified-lead, not just engagement.
How are you currently defining ROI for your brand partners? Are they looking at engagement, traffic, sales, or something else entirely?
Also—document everything. I keep a running spreadsheet of every campaign I touch, organized by market, creator tier, content type, and final ROI. After 200+ campaigns, patterns emerge that you absolutely cannot see from a single project. That’s your real competitive advantage.
I’m approaching this from a US DTC perspective, so take this with that context: we’ve actually moved away from trying to make cross-market comparisons. Here’s why—the cost structures are so different that benchmarking becomes nearly meaningless.
Instead, we build independent unit economics for each market:
US influencer model: We’re optimizing for cost-per-acquisition and repeat purchase rate. Average CPM is $15-25. We expect 2-3% engaged audience, but we’re buying for a specific audience segment.
LATAM influencer model: We’re optimizing for brand awareness and community building first, conversion second. CPM runs $3-8. Engagement is higher, but intent is lower.
These are fundamentally different business models. Trying to compare them directly is like comparing apples to oranges—you end up making bad decisions.
My advice: Build ROI frameworks that are market-native, not comparative. What drives growth in Mexico? What drives growth in Miami? Let them be different.
What’s your actual business goal in each market? That’s the real question that should drive benchmark selection.
One more tactical note: if you’re going to compare anything across markets, compare cohort retention and LTV, not engagement. Engagement is noise. Long-term customer value is the only metric that matters for real ROI.