Nutriva's cheapest ad channel was its most expensive. Here's how we fixed it.
Found the ad channel bringing in one-time buyers and more than doubled profit per customer.
Every brand in our case studies is a fictional example brand, including Nutriva. The numbers are modeled from realistic Shopify and Klaviyo data to show the kind of improvement we help brands make. The method is the one we use with clients.
The situation
Nutriva's cheapest ad channel brought in the most customers for the least money, so the budget kept moving there. At the same time, fewer customers were coming back, and email got the blame.
This might be you if
- Repeat purchase is falling and nobody knows why
- You judge ad channels by cost per customer
- Your marketing and retention teams look at different numbers
What we found
The 'best' channel brought one-time buyers
Customers from the cheapest channel were worth $7.80 in profit after 90 days. Customers from search were worth $25.90.
The emails weren't broken
The mix of customers had changed. More of them came from the channel that rarely came back.
What we built
- A scorecard that judges each ad channel by 90-day profit, not first-order cost
- A clearer ad offer and landing page for the weak channel
- A welcome journey for customers from that channel
- Budget moved toward channels that bring in customers who come back
The result
The cheapest channel became a good one. Its profit per customer went from $7.80 to $20.60, and across the business ad spend paid for itself within 90 days.
The takeaway for your brand
The cheapest customer isn't the most profitable one. Retention starts with who you acquire.
Free retention call
Could your brand grow like Nutriva?
Book a free 30-minute call. We'll look at your repeat purchase rate, your flows and your offers together, and put a number on what's being left on the table. You leave with one or two early observations and a straight answer on whether a deeper audit is worth it.