Benchmarking UGC and influencer ROI: how do you know if you're winning or just overspending?

For Businesses with Russian Roots Expanding Abroad
1

I’ve been running campaigns for a while, but last month I realized I actually have no idea if my numbers are good. Like, I know how much I spent and roughly what I got back, but I don’t have a reference point. Is 3:1 ROAS good in influencer marketing, or is that low? Is my cost-per-acquisition normal, or am I throwing money at creators who aren’t really moving the needle?

I’ve been talking to other founders and getting wildly different answers. Some say influencer ROI should be 5:1 minimum. Others are bragging about 10:1. Some admit they don’t track ROI at all and just do it for brand awareness. Which one of us is delusional?

The problem gets worse when I try to think about cross-market benchmarks. What works as a benchmark in Russia might be completely different in the US. US markets might have higher competition for creator attention, which pushes costs up. Or maybe I’m just getting ripped off.

I keep hearing about people who reference case studies and data from their experiences, and I want to be that person. But how do you actually build benchmarks when you’re operating across markets? Do you look at industry data? At what other brands are doing? Or is every business so different that benchmarks are useless?

How are you guys actually measuring if you’re winning?

2

Отличный вопрос, и честно, большинство маркетологов неправильно к нему подходят. Позвольте мне дать вам точные числа на основе того, что я видела.

Окончательные ROAS-бенчмарки по типу кампании (на основе 200+ кампаний):

  • Micro-influencers (10K-100K followers): 4:1 to 6:1 ROAS (это норма)
  • Mid-tier influencers (100K-1M): 2.5:1 to 4:1 ROAS (большой аккаунт = меньше включения на follower)
  • Nano-influencers (под 10K): 6:1 to 8:1 ROAS (лучшее вовлечение, хуже масштабируемость)
  • UGC-only кампании: 3:1 to 5:1 ROAS (в фактических секунд часиков реже связаны с лаврой)

Теперь это разбивается по рынкам:

  • Россия: ROAS имеет тенденцию быть 20-30% выше (меньше конкуренции, аудитория более готова к непрямой рекламе)
  • США: ROAS на 15-20% ниже из-за более высокой конкуренции за внимание создателя и более критичной аудитории
  • Европа: переменная (зависит от страны, Германия может быть ниже, чем США)

Критическая метрика, которую вы пропускаете: стоимость за создание (не за ингредиент, за создание). А вот где ваша маржа реально жива.

  • Сильная кампания: $1,500-3,000 за создание (дизайн, снимок контента, правки)
  • Средняя кампания: $3,000-7,000
  • Дорогая/неэффективная кампания: $7,000+

Если вы платите $10K за создание и получаете 3:1 ROAS на $20K в доход, вы на самом деле платили 50% вашего дохода просто на создание. Это проблема.

Что делать сейчас:

  1. Запустите расчетную таблицу с этими столбцами:

    • Кампания ID
    • Дата
    • Рынок (Россия vs США)
    • Тип создателя (nano / micro / mid / nano)
    • Стоимость производства
    • Стоимость платного взаимодействия (если применимо)
    • Доход, добранный от этой кампании
    • ROAS

  2. Оцифруйте это за последние 6 месяцев

  3. Затем посмотрите на закономерность. Какая комбинация (тип создателя + рынок + расходы на производство) дает вам лучший ROAS?

  4. Масштабируйте ЭТОЙ комбинации

Основная ошибка, которую я вижу? Люди трутся случайными создателями, а не тестируют структурированным образом. Вы не можете улучшить, если вы не отслеживаете.

Какой ROAS вы видели на данный момент?

3

Второй момент на benchmarking между маркетами: не пытайтесь сравнивать яблоки с апельсинами прямо. Россия и США имеют разные валюты, разные покупательные способности, разные издержки для создателей.

Вместо этого посмотрите на normalized metrics:

  • CPA (стоимость за приобретение), не ROAS
  • Стоимость за производство как % от дохода
  • Скорость преобразования (сколько человек на самом деле купили после просмотра контента)

Это числа, которые транспортируются между рынками.

4

Anna’s right on the tactical numbers. Let me add the strategic benchmarking layer.

When you’re comparing across markets, you need separate benchmarks. Here’s why:

Russia vs. US Market Dynamics:

  • Russian audiences are more accustomed to “sponsored” content labels and are generally more forgiving of overt marketing. US audiences are more skeptical and expect authenticity.
  • Creator costs in Russia: $200-2000 per post (depending on size). US: $500-5000 for equivalent reach. So your absolute ROAS will look different even if the actual quality is similar.
  • Conversion rates: US audiences convert 15-25% higher, but cost per conversion is often 30-40% higher due to platform costs.

Building Your Own Benchmarks (the right way):

  1. Establish a baseline by Creator Tier + Market combination:

    • Track 5-10 campaigns per tier per market
    • After 30 campaigns of data, you have real benchmarks
    • Update quarterly, because algorithms and seasons shift

  2. Track these metrics (not just ROAS):

    • Cost-per-engagement (more stable than ROAS)
    • Cost-per-landing-page-visit (tells you if the content is compelling)
    • Conversion rate from landing page (tells you if the traffic is qualified)
    • Repeat purchase rate from influencer-driven traffic (tells you about customer quality)

  3. Create “efficiency scores” per creator:

    • Raw ROAS is too noisy. Efficiency = Revenue / (Content Cost + Paid Promotion Cost)
    • Creators with high efficiency scores get more budget. Simple.

  4. Account for seasonality and platform changes:

    • A campaign that gets 4:1 ROAS in January might only get 2:1 in July
    • Instagram changed its algorithm in 2023? Your historical benchmarks might be out of date
    • Track date and algorithm changes alongside your metrics

The honest truth about benchmarks:

  • 3:1 ROAS is actually quite good for most industries
  • 5:1+ requires either extremely efficient creators or very high-margin products
  • 10:1 ROAS usually means either a novelty (won’t last) or your benchmarking is off (you’re not counting all costs)

People bragging about 10:1 often aren’t counting production costs, or they’re measuring something upstream of actual sales.

What industry are you in? That actually does shift benchmarks quite a bit.

5

Я давал много времени на это, и вот моя реальная история:

В первый год я не отслеживал никакого ROAS. Я просто тратил деньги и надеялся, что они вернутся. Когда я наконец это посчитал, я обнаружил, что я был на 1.8:1 ROAS. Это было плохо.

So what I did: I stopped for a month. I mapped out exactly where money was flowing:

  • How much per creator
  • How much per piece of content
  • How much in platform spend
  • What came back

It was humbling. I was paying creators $3K for content that generated $5K in immediate revenue, which sounds okay until you realize you can’t scale to profitability that way.

Here’s what changed:

  1. I started negotiating creator fees based on performance, not just follower count. “We’ll pay $1K up front, +$2 per conversion.”
  2. I started tracking which types of content converted, not just which creators performed well. Turns out my product photography was bad, but I was blaming the creators.
  3. I built in a 3-month test period for any new creator. Only after they proved themselves did I increase their fees.

Now I’m at 4.2:1 ROAS. It’s not 10:1, but it’s sustainable, and I know exactly why each campaign performs.

The advice: stop comparing to others’ benchmarks and build your own. Your benchmarks are the ones from your last 10 campaigns. Beat those. Keep beating them. That’s the game.

Cross-market benchmarking? Honestly, I stopped trying. I treat Russia like Russia and the US like the US. Different playbooks, different metrics. Easier that way.

6

From a creator’s perspective, I can tell you that ROAS is only part of the story.

Some of the best creators I know have lower immediate ROAS because their audience is smaller but super loyal. Long-term, those followers turn into repeat customers. A micro-influencer with 15K followers who has 8% engagement is going to move needles over time better than a mid-tier account with 300K followers and 0.5% engagement.

Brands sometimes hire me, see lower ROAS in month 1, and drop me. Brands who stick around see better results in months 2 and 3 because my audience starts to trust the product.

So when you’re benchmarking, don’t just look at immediate ROAS. Look at repeat purchase rates. Look at customer lifetime value, not just first purchase. That’s where the real number lives.

Also—tiny thing—make sure you’re actually tracking attribution correctly. Some platforms are off by 20-30% on clicks or conversions. If your benchmarks are off by that much, you’re making bad decisions about who to hire.