An ecommerce owner who posts weekly performance updates on r/FacebookAds reported $255,692 in sales on $27,733 of ad spend across Meta and Google in nine days, a 9.21 blended ROAS, and credited two decisions that most accounts never make.
Cut the collection the P&L hates
First, he stopped advertising his lowest ticket collection entirely. A four month profit and loss review of just that collection showed about $200K lost once ad spend, content creator fees and free product were counted. Platform ROAS never surfaced this, only the per collection P&L did. Advertising now covers three collections instead of four, the cut line still picks up organic sales, and the team's ad production effort concentrates where the margin is.
One unique ad per concept
Second, his team analyzed over 2,000 ads tested in the previous three months. In their standard batches of three unique ads per test, the first original ad won 79 percent of the time. So they stopped producing variations that restate the same idea. Each test is now one unique ad per concept, with a single backup variation made but not launched, held for when the winner fades. The freed capacity means up to 300 genuinely distinct ads a month, and he says incremental performance has always come from new concepts, not from remixes of old ones.
Why it works
Variations mostly compete with themselves. A new concept gives Meta's delivery system a different audience pocket to find, which is where the incremental buyers are. And a per product P&L over months beats in-platform ROAS for deciding what deserves budget at all, because ROAS hides creator costs, production and margin.
How to copy it
Pull a profit and loss by collection or product line for the last quarter, all costs included, and cut what consistently loses. Then audit your own test history: count how often a variation actually beat the original. If the original usually wins, ship one ad per concept, bank one backup, and spend the saved production time on the next concept.
Credit: u/WizardOfEcommerce on Reddit