I’ve been running influencer campaigns in both Russia and the US, and I’m hitting this wall where ROI metrics just don’t align between the two regions. It’s driving me crazy.
In Russia, I can track engagement pretty well—comments, shares, community feedback. It feels tangible. But tracking actual sales or leads? That’s harder because a lot of our Russian audience just browses, and the purchase happens later (or on a different channel). Meanwhile, in the US, I’ve got cleaner attribution—people click links, they buy, I can see the ROAS.
So now I’m stuck: I’m comparing apples and oranges. A campaign that shows amazing engagement in Russia might have lower ROAS than a US campaign that got half the engagement but drove more direct conversions. How do I know if I’m actually allocating my budget efficiently across both markets if I can’t measure them the same way?
I’ve tried using standard KPIs (CPE, CPM, ROAS), but those metrics favor different market dynamics. US favors direct conversion metrics, Russia favors engagement and brand lift metrics. It’s like I need two different measurement systems running in parallel, but then how do I actually compare them and decide where to invest more?
Has anyone figured out a consistent way to measure and compare influencer ROI across different regions? Or is this just something you learn to live with—treating each region completely separately and having different success metrics for each?
Это реально сложный вопрос, потому что два рынка работают очень по-разному. Но я вам скажу, что я вижу в своей работе с коллабораций.
Основная идея: вы правы, что нельзя сравнивать напрямую. Но можно создать единую метрику, которая вмещает оба рынка—это может быть что-то вроде «lifetime value» контакта. В России контакт может быть холоднее, но превращаться в лояльного клиента со временем. В США контакт может быть горячее, но более волатильный.
Мой совет: отслеживайте не только immediate ROI, но и долгосрочное engagement каждого контакта. Если русский микро-инфлюенсер привлекает менее конверсивную, но более лояльную аудиторию, это может быть ценнее на 6-12 месячный горизонт.
Я разбирала эту проблему с нашей BI командой, и вот что мы нашли: проблема в том, что вы пытаетесь измерить разные вещи одинаково.
Вот мой подход:
Для России:
- Primary KPI: Cost per Engaged User (CPEU) и Brand Lift (через post-campaign surveys)
- Secondary: Прямые упоминания бренда, сохранения контента
- Long-term: Repeat engagement от одной аудитории
Для США:
- Primary KPI: ROAS и Cost per Acquisition
- Secondary: Click-through Rate и Time-to-Purchase
- Long-term: Customer Lifetime Value
Потом я создал нормализованный индекс для каждого региона (0-100), где 100 = benchmark для этого рынка. Кампания в России, которая дает 85 баллов по нашему Russian KPI индексу, может быть ровно такая же ценная, как кампания в США с 85 баллов по US KPI индексу.
Это позволило мне сравнивать яблоки с яблоками внутри единой системы.
Я год назад запустил кампании в обоих регионах, и вот что я учился.
Русская аудитория—это не просто конвертируется в сразу в sales. Но она покупает! Просто через другие каналы и с хуже attribution. Американская аудитория—это полная видимость funnel’а.
Что я делаю: я отслеживаю две параллельные метрики. Для России я смотрю на “brand sentiment” и “share of voice” в нише, плюс долгосрочные продажи, которые хоть как-то можно отнести к кампаниям. Для США я смотрю на прямой ROAS. Потом я просто решил, что буду выделять 40% бюджета для России (долгосрочное brand building) и 60% для США (прямой ROI).
Мне помогло просто признать, что у меня есть две стратегии, не одна.
Classic problem that every agency working across markets hits. Here’s what we’ve learned:
You’re right that you can’t use the same metrics. But you CAN use a unified framework if you think of it differently.
Instead of trying to make Russian engagement and US conversions comparable, track customer journey stage attribution:
- Stage 1 (Awareness): Influencer reached them → measure reach, impressions, engagement
- Stage 2 (Consideration): They engaged with content → measure share of voice, sentiment
- Stage 3 (Decision): They converted or purchased → measure conversion, ROAS
Russian influencers might excel at stages 1-2. US influencers might excel at stages 2-3. So instead of saying “which one performed better?” ask “which one is better at this specific stage of our funnel?”
Then allocate budget based on your funnel needs, not by region. If you need 30% awareness, 50% consideration, 20% conversion, you might naturally end up with 50% budget to Russia (awareness/consideration specialists) and 50% to US (consideration/conversion specialists).
Doesn’t matter that metrics look different—you’re now measuring them by what they’re actually supposed to do.
Okay, as a creator working with brands, I’ll tell you something: the issue is you’re trying to measure everything immediately. Influencers in Russia build slower trust, but its super loyal. In the US, we’re on platforms where everything is faster-paced, so conversions are quicker.
What I’d suggest: use UTM codes and tracking links for everything, but also give at least 30 days after a campaign to see the full impact. Some people see my content and buy 2 weeks later. Some click right away.
Also, don’t underestimate word-of-mouth in Russia. I have Russian followers who tell their friends about products. That’s real ROI, but it’s hard to track. In the US, everything’s more direct—click, buy, done.
So maybe set up two scorecards: one that measures immediate ROI (USA-style), one that measures 30-60 day impact and word-of-mouth potential (Russia-style)?
This is a sophisticated analytics problem. Here’s a data-driven approach I’ve implemented with clients:
Create a Unified Attribution Model:
-
Multi-touch Attribution: Don’t credit the last click. Use a 40-20-40 model (40% first touch, 20% middle, 40% last touch) to give credit to influencers across the funnel, regardless of whether they drive immediate conversions.
-
Cohort Analysis: Segment audiences by source (Russian influence, US influencer, organic, paid). Track their 30/60/90-day behavior and LTV. Often, Russian-sourced cohorts have lower immediate ROAS but higher 90-day LTV because they’re more engaged and loyal.
-
Benchmark Against Region-Specific Baselines:
- Russian benchmark: 5-8% engagement rate, $2-5 CPEU, 15-25% month-2 repeat engagement
- US benchmark: 2-3% engagement rate, $4-8 CPL, 40-60% direct conversion within 7 days
-
Blended ROI Score: Create a weighted metric:
- (Immediate ROAS × 0.4) + (30-day LTV lift × 0.3) + (Brand Sentiment × 0.3) = Blended Score
This allows you to compare campaigns fairly across regions because you’re measuring the full journey, not just first-touch or last-touch.
Actionable insight: Most brands allocate 60% US, 40% Russia naturally once they use a blended metric. Direct conversions favor US, but lifetime value and brand building favor Russia.
What’s your current average customer LTV, and how does it differ between Russian and US cohorts?