Selected work · 2014 — present
Case studies, written like we'd brief a board.
Six anonymized engagements covering the work we get hired for most: fixing measurement, rebuilding paid accounts, and making channels work together instead of against each other.
Client names withheld under NDA. References available after a scoping call.
Return on ad spend after we rebuilt the paid search and paid social account structure, fixed conversion tracking, and reset bidding.
Cost per acquisition fell once we cleared duplicate conversions, stopped branded-search cannibalization, and tightened audience overlap.
Qualified lead volume from a full-funnel program with SEO, paid, landing pages, and CRM working against one revenue target.
The work, written the way we'd talk about it in the room.
Each entry follows the same arc: what the brand looked like when we walked in, what we actually changed, and the number that moved.
- 01
Paid media efficiency
Multi-market consumer brand running Google Ads, Meta, and programmatic.
The situation. ROAS had plateaued for three consecutive quarters and the team could not isolate whether the issue was creative, audience, bidding, or measurement.
What we did. Consolidate fragmented campaigns into a clean account architecture, fix duplicated conversions, separate branded from non-branded budgets, and introduce a structured weekly creative testing cadence tied to a single revenue KPI.
ROAS increased 187% within two quarters without raising media budget, with measurement now trusted by finance and the executive team.
What we reviewed first
- Account structure across Google Ads and Meta
- Conversion tracking and duplicate event firing
- Audience overlap, exclusions, and frequency caps
- Creative rotation, fatigue, and learning-phase exits
- Branded vs non-branded search incrementality
Takeaway — Most paid media plateaus are measurement and structure problems, not creative problems. Fix the architecture before you scale spend.
- 02
Lead generation growth
B2B services brand with a long, multi-touch sales cycle.
The situation. Marketing was generating activity but not pipeline. Sales claimed leads were unqualified and the CRM had no reliable lead source attribution.
What we did. Rebuild the demand engine around bottom-of-funnel intent first — high-intent SEO and paid search, gated assets aligned to real buying questions, and a tightened MQL definition agreed with sales before scaling top-of-funnel demand.
Qualified lead volume grew 134% and sales reported a measurable improvement in lead quality and close rate within the same fiscal year.
What we reviewed first
- Demand source mix and form fill quality
- Lifecycle stage definitions and MQL criteria
- CRM lead routing, scoring, and SLA adherence
- Landing page conversion paths and offer relevance
- SEO and AI-visibility coverage of buyer-intent queries
Takeaway — Lead volume is only useful when sales agrees what qualified means. Define MQL with revenue, then scale the channels that produce it.
- 03
Cost per acquisition
DTC and retail brand scaling paid acquisition across the US and Canada.
The situation. CPA was climbing month over month even as the team added new campaigns, audiences, and creative. Leadership could not tell which lever was actually working.
What we did. Implement server-side tracking with proper deduplication, suppress existing customers from prospecting, fix the highest-traffic landing pages, and rebalance budget toward channels with proven incrementality.
CPA dropped 43% over a single quarter while volume held flat, freeing budget for testing new channels without risking the revenue baseline.
What we reviewed first
- Server-side conversion tracking and event deduplication
- Audience exclusions and customer-match suppression
- Landing page load speed and conversion rate
- Attribution windows and assisted conversion behavior
- Promo, discount, and offer dependency
Takeaway — Rising CPA is usually a signal of tracking decay, audience overlap, or landing page rot — not a signal to add more campaigns.
- 04
Full funnel strategy
Growth-focused brand running paid, SEO, CRM, and social as separate teams.
The situation. Each channel reported wins, but blended revenue was flat. There was no shared definition of the funnel and no single owner of the customer journey end to end.
What we did. Stand up a single full-funnel operating model with one shared scorecard across paid, organic, and CRM, aligned messaging by buyer stage, and a unified weekly review focused on pipeline and revenue rather than per-channel vanity metrics.
Channel performance compounded instead of competing. Paid efficiency, organic share of voice, and CRM revenue all moved upward together against a single revenue plan.
What we reviewed first
- Funnel stage definitions and shared revenue model
- Message and offer continuity from ad to landing to email
- Attribution model and contribution by channel
- Channel handoffs between paid, organic, and CRM
- Reporting cadence and executive scorecard
Takeaway — When channels are managed in isolation, they cannibalize each other. A shared funnel and shared scorecard turn parallel work into compounding growth.
- 05
Multi-location performance
Multi-location and franchise brand with dozens of physical locations.
The situation. National brand campaigns were running, but local visibility, reviews, and store-level traffic varied widely by market with no consistent operating standard.
What we did. Roll out a standardized multi-location playbook covering Google Business Profile, local landing pages, review operations, and geo-targeted paid media, with a location-level scorecard that surfaces underperforming markets monthly.
Local search visibility, store-level traffic signals, and conversion actions improved across the network, with a clear, repeatable process for opening and scaling new locations.
What we reviewed first
- Google Business Profile completeness and consistency
- Local landing page structure, schema, and on-page SEO
- Review velocity, response rate, and reputation signals
- Local paid search and Performance Max geo controls
- Location-level reporting and benchmarking
Takeaway — Multi-location brands do not need more campaigns. They need a documented operating standard applied consistently across every market.
- 06
Marketing analytics clarity
Enterprise brand whose leadership had lost trust in marketing reporting.
The situation. GA4, ad platforms, the CRM, and finance all reported different revenue numbers. Marketing decisions were being deferred because no one agreed on the source of truth.
What we did. Rebuild measurement around a single agreed revenue definition, fix GA4 and server-side tracking, enforce UTM and channel governance, and replace fragmented reports with one executive dashboard reviewed weekly.
Marketing, sales, and finance now reference the same numbers in the same dashboard. Budget decisions move faster and are defensible to the board.
What we reviewed first
- GA4 configuration, event schema, and key-event mapping
- Server-side tracking and consent mode setup
- Channel grouping, UTM governance, and attribution model
- CRM-to-ad-platform feedback loops
- Executive dashboard structure and definitions
Takeaway — You cannot optimize what leadership does not trust. Measurement clarity is a prerequisite for every other marketing decision.
One scorecard. Agreed before work starts.
We measure against the metrics that decide whether marketing earned its budget — and we agree on the definitions in writing before the first sprint.
- Revenue
- Every engagement ties to a revenue number leadership has agreed on — not impressions, clicks, or sessions.
- Qualified demand
- Volume and quality of pipeline-ready leads and opportunities, defined jointly with sales.
- CPA
- Blended and channel-level cost per acquisition tracked against a target CAC tied to lifetime value and margin.
- ROAS
- Measured with deduplicated conversions and incrementality, not platform-reported vanity numbers.
- Conversion rate
- From ad to landing page to lead to customer, reviewed against benchmarks by funnel stage.
- Channel efficiency
- Spend, contribution, and incrementality compared across paid, organic, social, CRM, and content.
- Reporting clarity
- One executive dashboard that marketing, sales, and finance all reference — same definitions, same cadence.
Questions we hear most.
Are these marketFX case studies real?+
Yes. The headline performance numbers — 187% ROAS increase, 43% CPA reduction, and 134% lead volume growth — are real outcomes from marketFX engagements. Client names, logos, and confidential details are intentionally withheld to honor non-disclosure agreements.
Why are case studies anonymized?+
Most of our enterprise, franchise, and multi-location clients have contractual or competitive reasons to keep specific results private. Anonymization lets us share the diagnostic, the strategy, and the outcome without disclosing client identity or sensitive numbers.
Can marketFX provide references on request?+
Yes. After an initial scoping conversation and mutual NDA, we can connect qualified prospective clients with relevant reference contacts whose engagement profile resembles theirs.
How does marketFX define a successful engagement?+
Success is defined before work starts. We align on a target revenue outcome, a measurement model, and a small number of leading indicators. Every weekly and quarterly review references the same scorecard from day one.
Find out where your marketing is leaking revenue.
A marketFX audit identifies wasted spend, attribution gaps, and the three highest-leverage moves your team can make in the next 90 days — across paid, SEO, AI visibility, analytics, and CRM.