Metadata released their second annual benchmark report yesterday. This time, surprisingly, it was a gated ebook... According to the report, it seems that companies using Metadata allocate around 75% of their budget to lead generation and 25% to brand awareness. (Image 1) Here's my take: Looking at the combined figures from two periods (pre-2022 and post-2022) and two channels (Linkedin and Facebook), the total ad spend was $129M and a total of 308k MQLs have been generated. (Image 2) So average cost per MQL was $418; which is not necessarily a bad figure depending on the ACV and the average sales cycle. In the second part of the report, if you look at the post-2022 LinkedIn data (Image 3); the total ad spend is $46.5M with the cost per lead standing at $123. Reverse-engineering these data points ($46.5M spend/$123 cost per lead) suggests that there were 374k leads. In the first part of the report, it was stated that a total of 308k MQLs were generated. Therefore, it appears that 'leads' in the second part do not refer to MQLs, but to leads in general. Following the same logic, a $46M spend with a $3.1k cost per opportunity yields a total of 14.7k opportunities generated. Therefore, the conversion rate is calculated as 374k leads divided by 14.7k opportunities = 3.92% conversion rate. Even if we're not talking about MQLs but leads in general, this lead-to-opportunity conversion rate is woeful. It seems that companies are using Metadata primarily for lead-gen campaigns, and these companies are achieving above-average CTRs and cheap CPCs, but that's it. The conversion rates are low, and the cost per opportunity is high; most importantly, not sustainable. This, once again, validates that demand generation is the answer. #demandgeneration #b2bmarketing
Canberk Beker loved this analysis. 🙌🏼 Although I’d agree to disagree on the takeaway haha. I think you pointed out one clear action for our next benchmark report, split out lead gen into its different types. Gated content, demos, trials, sign ups; all drastically different strategies that are lumped under the one “lead gen bucket”, but have completely different outcomes and CVRs. I wouldn’t say that companies are only using us for unsustainable lead gen though. Our reporting stack shows really clearly what is converting to ops, and our clients double down on those areas. The general consensus = invest less in gated content, increase more budget in demos and PLG, also heavily invest in demand gen which highlights the problems the product actually solves for the audience. The true story is that those 374k leads, contain a lot of gated content, which customers are turning away from thanks to our pipeline reporting haha. Although most B2B orgs enter our doors with a huge reliance on it, so it naturally weights the figures! ⚖️
Canberk, I always enjoy your detailed posts, thought provoking as always. I checked out the report and was curious to get your thoughts on auto v manual bid. On LinkedIn, they give the following stats for auto bid: - $98.61 per 'lead' - $4,693.29 per 'opportunity' For manual bid: - $149.10 per 'lead' - $1,632.49 per 'opportunity'
Canberk Beker and Tim Davidson do these numbers take into account the agency fees, the platform fee for tools like Metadata? When you add that to the equation, its even worse. Lastly, what value a platform like Metadata offers that you couldn't do with a ABM list you can source and upload to Linkedin?
What’s the definition of “demand gen” in this case?
Thank you for sharing Canberk Beker. Since the conversion rates are low and the cost per opportunity is high for Lead generation, would you know the conversion rates and cost per opportunity benchmarks for demand generation? Which helps validates demand gen initiatives?
if you figure out demand gen + outbound you are unstoppable
It would have been great if they shared the Pipeline Generated / Pipeline influenced numbers post April 2022. Can get a average ACV, and the CAC payback estimate. For Facebook , Opportunity to Lead looks like 2%. The finding the Linkedin B2B audience in FB/Instagram argument doesn't make sense.
Even if you don't believe demand gen is the answer...your lead gen doesnt work and this is why when the economy gets hard marketing spend gets slashed and marketing teams get reduced. We see a version of this math with 100% of our customers when they come inbound. the math and the truth is right in your crm...should you have the courage to see it :)
Lifecycle & Product-Led Sales Leader @ Apollo.io
1yDoes anyone see where to download this report? 🤔