By Ryan Richardson · Published 8 October 2026
our ad naming convention tags some cold-traffic ads by the opening hook used, letting performance be compared hook to hook across a pool of otherwise-similar ads. 'Stuck' and 'failed' are two of those hook tags with enough spend and impressions to read.
Two other hook tags ('quit', 'early') had under A$20 spend or under 1,000 impressions and are too thin to include.
| Hook | Ads | Spend | Impressions | CTR | Landing page views | Purchases |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stuck | 37 | A$123.39 | 22,723 | 8.37% | 987 | 0 |
| Failed | 40 | A$65.57 | 8,983 | 8.10% | 437 | 0 |
Both hooks cleared a CTR most ad accounts would call strong, and both produced zero purchases on a combined 1,424 landing page views. This is the pattern this whole account shows repeatedly on cold hook/angle testing: a hook can clearly earn attention and still not be the thing that was holding sales back. Zero purchases here says nothing about whether the hook is good copy, only that clicking through didn't lead to a tracked sale in this spend window.
| Claim | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Stuck hook spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV/purchases | A$123.39 / 37 / 22,723 / 8.37% / 987 / 0 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Failed hook spend/ads/impressions/CTR/LPV/purchases | A$65.57 / 40 / 8,983 / 8.10% / 437 / 0 | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |
| Thin-data exclusion threshold used across this dataset | under 1,000 impressions or under A$20 spend | SUMMARY.md, Top 5 robust findings heading |
| Combined landing page views, stuck + failed hooks | 1,424 (987 + 437) | Sixty Steps ad account, Meta Ads data |