I’m deep in spreadsheet hell right now trying to figure out if our LATAM creator partnerships are actually outperforming or if I’m just looking at the wrong metrics.
Here’s my problem: We track engagement rate, reach, click-through rate, conversions. But when I compare a Mexican creator’s numbers to a US creator’s numbers on similar campaigns, the metrics don’t line up in a way that makes sense.
A LATAM creator might have 3.2% engagement rate while a US creator has 1.8% engagement rate. You’d think the LATAM creator wins, right? But the US creator drove more actual conversions because their audience had higher purchase intent.
So now I’m wondering: What benchmarks actually matter across borders?
Is engagement rate even comparable when the audiences are different sizes, in different markets, with different spending power? Should I be looking at cost-per-engagement instead? Cost-per-conversion? Should I weight metrics differently for different markets?
I’ve also noticed that LATAM creators get better engagement metrics but US creators often get better audience quality scores (demographic fit, income level, etc.).
The team wants a simple dashboard that shows “LATAM creators vs US creators—who’s winning.” But I don’t think that simple comparison exists. Or maybe I’m overcomplicating it.
What metrics are you actually using to compare creator performance across LATAM and US? And how do you present that to stakeholders without drowning them in data?
You’re asking the right question, and you’re right that simple comparisons are misleading. Here’s how I structure this:
First, establish your business KPI. Are you optimizing for brand awareness, consideration, or conversion? That changes everything.
For awareness: engagement rate matters, but weight it by audience reach quality. A LATAM creator with 3% engagement to a 100k audience (3k engaged) might beat a US creator with 1.5% engagement to a 500k low-quality audience (7.5k engaged). Look at engaged audience quality, not just engagement percentage.
For consideration: cost-per-impression and cost-per-engaged-user are better metrics. LATAM creators might be cheaper on a per-person basis, but if they’re reaching 100k people, the cost-per-thousand-impressions might actually be comparable to a US creator.
For conversion: cost-per-conversion is king. Everything else is secondary. A LATAM creator driving conversions at $12 each beats a US creator driving them at $18 each, period.
Second, segment by campaign length. LATAM creators often require longer-term commitments to perform (30+ days to build momentum). US creators can deliver in single posts. Comparing a 1-post US campaign to a 30-day LATAM partnership isn’t apples-to-apples.
Third, normalize for market penetration. A creator reaching 50k people in a market of 10M (0.5% penetration) is technically reaching a smaller percentage than someone reaching 100k in a market of 200M (0.05% penetration). Context matters.
My dashboard has three tiers: business KPI performance (top level), efficiency metrics (cost-per-outcome), and campaign details (length, audience size, engagement patterns). Shows the whole story without overwhelming stakeholders.
Also—and this is crucial—track cohort performance. Group LATAM creators by country (Brazil vs Mexico vs Colombia), then compare within cohorts first before comparing across regions. A Brazilian creator’s benchmarks shouldn’t be directly compared to a Colombian creator’s. The markets have different characteristics.
Once you’ve established within-market benchmarks, then you can make cross-border comparisons using normalized metrics like cost-per-conversion or cost-per-engaged-user.
The simple dashboard your stakeholders want might be: Campaign Name | Country | KPI (Conversions/Engagement/Reach) | Cost Per KPI | ROI. That’s the level of abstraction that usually works for execs without sacrificing accuracy.