22.4x Non-Branded ROAS and $719K Revenue, US High-Ticket E-commerce, Google Ads
The challenge
A US high-ticket e-commerce client wanted aggressive scale on Google Ads, but the existing structure mixed branded and non-branded traffic in the same campaigns, making it impossible to know what was real acquisition vs. demand they already had. Every spend decision was a guess, and scaling without clarity risked burning budget on traffic that would have converted for free.
What we did
Separated branded into its own campaign so non-branded ROAS reflected true incremental acquisition, not brand demand bleeding into paid attribution
Restructured non-branded campaigns around margin contribution, not just revenue
Refined audience segmentation to push high-intent traffic deeper into the funnel
Implemented AI-powered bid strategies tied to value-based conversions, not last-click
Accepted a higher CPA in exchange for higher-AOV conversions, because the unit economics justified it at 22x+ ROAS
The results (non-branded performance)
Non-branded revenue: $342K → $719K, added $377K (+110%)
Non-branded ROAS: 16.51x → 22.43x (+35.85%)
Conversions: 135 → 257 (+90%)
CPA: $96.67 → $125 (+$28.33, +29%). Deliberate trade-off, see below.
Non-branded spend: $20.7K → $32K (+54.6%)
Branded campaigns ran separately. All metrics above reflect non-branded acquisition only.
Why it matters
Two things make this case study credible at $700/hr consultancy positioning. First, branded was isolated. Most accounts at this scale show inflated ROAS by letting brand traffic mix with paid attribution. Second, CPA went up on purpose. At 22.4x ROAS on a high-ticket AOV above $2,800, paying $125 for a conversion that delivers thousands in revenue is a textbook unit-economics play. Most accounts panic when CPA rises; the maths here said push harder. Revenue more than doubled as a result.
High-ticket e-commerce and want clarity on what your paid actually drives? Book a strategy call.