The Original Bed Co · UK ad account
August, in numbers
Three sales campaigns reported 85 website purchases and £68,132.46 in Meta-attributed purchase value from £6,205.99 of ad spend. This monthly view also compares the matching July campaign export.
Scope: Prospecting – TOF, RT – BOF and Testing – TOF, from the supplied August three-campaign export. Wider-account totals are outside these headline figures.
Campaign context · July–September 2026
The campaign context
Following purchase volume, attributed value and acquisition cost across three consistent campaign names.
Structure and reporting approach
The Original Bed Co’s UK Meta ad account is presented through three sales campaigns: Prospecting – TOF, RT – BOF and Testing – TOF. Their exported names suggest a structure spanning prospecting, retargeting and testing. This case study follows the reported purchase performance of that structure over three months.
The reporting keeps the same three-campaign scope each month and reads website purchases alongside attributed purchase value, spend, ROAS and cost per purchase. This shows whether higher reported value is accompanied by more purchases and how much ad spend sits behind the result.
Campaign roles are described from the exported names. Figures use each month’s matching three-campaign CSV; the source notes explain attribution and wider-account differences.
How the result developed
Prospecting led with 60 of 81 purchases. Combined reported ROAS was 9.83×, while Testing recorded five purchases. July provides the starting point for the monthly comparisons.
Testing rose from five to 18 purchases and from £3,043.00 to £15,952.00 in attributed purchase value. Its increase exceeded the declines in the other two campaigns, lifting the combined monthly value.
Prospecting and Retargeting both recorded more purchases than in August, while Testing retained 18. The combined result reached 97 purchases, 12.61× reported ROAS and £61.19 per purchase, with lower total spend.
September has 30 reporting days; July and August have 31 each. The September comparison includes daily averages for additive totals. These are Meta-attributed outcomes; the reports establish the result pattern, while individual audience, budget and creative decisions are outside the supplied evidence.
Reading the results
How the campaigns performed
Prospecting generated the largest attributed purchase value at £43,398.46, with 52 purchases and a 10.75× reported ROAS.
Testing recorded 18 purchases at £34.47 per purchase and the highest reported ROAS in this view, 25.71×. Retargeting recorded 15 purchases at a 5.67× ROAS.
Reading purchases and purchase value alongside ROAS and cost per purchase shows the balance between reported volume and cost efficiency.
Common scale: 0–30×. Source: Meta Ads Manager export, 1–31 August 2026.
Campaign detail · GBP
The full breakdown
| Campaign | Spend | Purchases | Purchase value | ROAS | Cost / purchase |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prospecting – TOF | £4,035.40 | 52 | £43,398.46 | 10.75× | £77.60 |
| RT – BOF | £1,550.21 | 15 | £8,782.00 | 5.67× | £103.35 |
| Testing – TOF | £620.38 | 18 | £15,952.00 | 25.71× | £34.47 |
| Combined · 3 campaigns | £6,205.99 | 85 | £68,132.46 | 10.98× | £73.01 |
Purchase counts and purchase value are reported by Meta. Combined ROAS is total purchase value divided by matching total spend.
Same three campaigns · Two 31-day months
July to August
Reported purchase value increased 13.92%, while spend increased 2.00%. Purchases rose from 81 to 85 and combined cost per purchase fell 2.80%.
| Metric | July 2026 | August 2026 | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ad spend | £6,084.24 | £6,205.99 | +£121.75 · +2.00% |
| Website purchases | 81 | 85 | +4 · +4.94% |
| Attributed purchase value | £59,805.70 | £68,132.46 | +£8,326.76 · +13.92% |
| Combined reported ROAS | 9.83× | 10.98× | +11.69% |
| Cost per purchase | £75.11 | £73.01 | −£2.10 · −2.80% |
Testing recorded more purchases
Testing rose from 5 to 18 purchases. Its attributed purchase value increased from £3,043.00 to £15,952.00, while spend rose from £587.53 to £620.38.
Fewer purchases in the other campaigns
Prospecting purchases fell from 60 to 52, and Retargeting fell from 16 to 15. Their reported ROAS declined from 11.18× to 10.75× and from 8.11× to 5.67× respectively.
The combined result improved
Testing’s increase in attributed purchase value exceeded the declines in the other two campaigns. Total reported purchase value rose by £8,326.76.
Comparison uses each month’s three-campaign CSV and matching exported attribution settings. Percentage changes use unrounded totals and ratios. These reports do not establish what caused the changes.
Original reporting · 1–31 August 2026
Evidence behind the numbers
The supplied Meta Ads Manager screenshots retain the August reporting range and campaign names across three horizontal views. Open any image to inspect it at full size.
Purchases, reach and cost
Testing’s website purchases, reach, frequency and cost per purchase are visible in this view.
View full-size screenshot ↗
Spend and impressions
The next columns show campaign spend, impressions and link clicks, plus wider-account totals.
View full-size screenshot ↗
Clicks and landing-page views
This view shows click metrics, landing-page views and their cost, including Testing’s 349 landing-page views.
View full-size screenshot ↗Source, scope and attribution
Source: the supplied Meta Ads Manager three-campaign export for 1–31 August 2026, plus the original August screenshots. The July comparison uses the supplied three-campaign July export. All monetary figures are in GBP.
Attribution: Prospecting is exported with “Multiple attribution settings”. Retargeting and Testing use “7-day click, 1-day view or 1-day engaged view” in both monthly exports.
Calculation: £68,132.46 ÷ £6,205.99 = 10.98× combined ROAS. £6,205.99 ÷ 85 = £73.01 combined cost per purchase. Campaign ROAS values are not averaged. Attributed purchase value is not profit or independently verified incremental revenue.
The UK label identifies the ad account. Audience geography and the wider account’s other campaigns are outside the headline scope. July’s earlier screenshots show a different Testing spend from its latest CSV, as explained on the July page.
The series so far
More purchases, stronger reported return
Across the supplied July–September exports, purchases rose from 81 to 97 and attributed purchase value rose 25.11%, while total spend fell 2.45%. Combined cost per purchase fell 18.54%. Each monthly report preserves its campaign breakdown, original screenshots and attribution notes.
These are full-month comparisons across 31, 31 and 30 days. The 14-month report for August 2025–September 2026 is also available.