This is the subhead for the blog post
We’ve discussed Brand Lift 2.0 before when we compared it to the original Brand Lift product from Google. The two key benefits of 2.0 were the abilities to see performance by the campaign level and to make intra-flight adjustments. These two features bring branding into the realm of performance marketing and are why I’m so bullish on Brand Lift 2.0.
Let me explain.
Historically, if we wanted to run a branding campaign, we’d focus on metrics like CPM, CPV, and view rate. The problem is, we’re forced to make a crucial assumption: Are we better off reaching a broader audience where we can drive a low CPM/CPV or focusing on a much more targeted group that may be more inclined to remember and consider our brand?
Brand Lift 2.0 helps us answer that question. With the Cost per Lifted User metric (Cost/(Unique Reach * Absolute Lift)), we can see if the premium we pay for more a tightly targeted audience is worth it.
We ran Brand Lift 2.0 with Helix last quarter. Our goal was to drive an increase in Brand Consideration during their big holiday sale. We ran a handful of audiences consisting of Affinity Audiences, Custom Affinity Audiences, and Similar Audiences. CPMs varied from $10 to $14 and CPV from $0.02 to $0.05, a pretty substantial range (with the highest costs coming from our Similar Audiences, as we anticipated). Surprisingly, view rate was actually lowest on our Similar Audiences. Without having access to Brand Lift metrics, we’d end up shifting budget away from the Similar Audience. However, because we used Brand Lift 2.0, we could see that we drove our highest levels of brand consideration lift on Similar Audiences, enough of an increase over the broader audiences that when we back out to cost per lifted user, it was more cost-effective to shift budget to Similar Audiences. Since results are delivered in near real time, we could shift budget to Similar Audiences and move Helix into the consideration set of more people during the highly important holiday season.