By Ryan Richardson · Published 8 October 2026
Nexlytics is a $9 Power BI / data-health audit offer. Across 2025-2026, 4 distinct variables were tested on cold Facebook traffic trying to find a combination that would convert: which language/audience variant works best, which Meta campaign objective (landing-page-view vs lead-form) drives cheaper signups, a versioned copy/offer update, and an 8-segment audience discovery batch.
The copy-iteration sub-test drew by far the most impressions (109,440) and landing page views (3,812) of any Nexlytics test at meaningful spend, but that volume didn't translate into a tracked sale either.
| Test | Ads | Spend | Impressions | CTR | Landing page views | Purchases |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Language/audience matrix | 52 | A$875.16 | 17,909 | 6.72% | 186 | 0 |
| LPV-objective vs Leads-objective split | 121 | A$668.62 | 96,752 | 1.65% | 1,218 | 0 |
| Copy/offer iteration (round 2) | 52 | A$486.97 | 109,440 | 3.85% | 3,812 | 0 |
| 8-segment audience discovery batch | 227 | A$103.69 | 36,679 | 2.86% | 841 | 0 |
The 8-segment discovery batch targeted managers, developers, offshore teams, analysts inheriting others' work, ops, agencies, CFOs and execs. Of those 8, only the manager segment (29 ads, A$42.47 spend, 5.07% CTR, 465 landing page views) cleared the A$20-spend bar needed to read its CTR as more than noise; the other 7 each spent under A$20 individually.
Nothing in this data won on sales: 0 purchases across a combined 452 ads and A$2,135.34. By CTR/engagement, the language/audience matrix (6.72% CTR) and the copy-iteration test (3.85% CTR on 109,440 impressions, the largest reach of the four) both show real engagement. Honestly stated: this is 4 separate tests that all cleared the bar for getting attention and none that cleared the bar for making a sale, on a product this account has never recorded a sale for across any test pulled.
When a product consistently shows engagement (clicks, landing page views) but zero sales across multiple independent tests of different variables (language, objective, copy, audience), that's a signal to stop iterating on ad-level variables and look at the offer, price point or landing page itself, since the ad side has already been tested from several angles with the same result.
| Claim | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Language/audience matrix: spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV/purchases | A$875.16 / 52 / 17,909 / 6.72% / 186 / 0 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| LPV vs Leads objective split: spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV/purchases | A$668.62 / 121 / 96,752 / 1.65% / 1,218 / 0 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Copy/offer iteration (round 2): spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV/purchases | A$486.97 / 52 / 109,440 / 3.85% / 3,812 / 0 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| 8-segment audience discovery batch: spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV/purchases | A$103.69 / 227 / 36,679 / 2.86% / 841 / 0 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Combined spend across the 4 sub-tests | A$2,135.34 (A$875.16 + A$668.62 + A$486.97 + A$103.69) | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Combined ad count across the 4 sub-tests | 452 (52 + 121 + 52 + 227) | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Manager audience segment: spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV | A$42.47 / 29 / 10,801 / 5.07% / 465 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Discovery batch targeted 8 segments: execs, devs, managers, CFOs, offshore teams, analysts inheriting work, agencies, ops | confirmed | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |