ANONYMIZED PRODUCTION CASE
Traffic optimization case: from negative ROI to a controlled positive result
A performance marketing team used configured rules and placement-level analysis to identify weak traffic, review actions, and recalculate the funnel as new events arrived.
In short
In the documented period, ROI changed from −99.24% to +7.56%, cost per registration fell from $5.36 to $1.73, and registrations per day rose from 11 to 39.7. The result is a case observation, not a guarantee.ANONYMIZED PRODUCTION CASE
Funnel performance — before vs after rules
Each pair is scaled within its own metric. Exact values are shown.
Baseline and measured outcome
The comparison uses exact before and after values inside each metric rather than visually comparing bars that use different scales.
- ROI: −99.24% → +7.56% (+106.8 percentage points)
- Cost / registration: $5.36 → $1.73 (−68%)
- Registrations / day: 11 → 39.7 (3.6×)
- Deposits / day: 0.25 → 3.65 (14.6×)
- Profit / day: $0.44 → $5.20 (11.8×)
Operating method
The team defined conditions and allowed actions. ArbiNeuro surfaced weak placements, kept the reason and scope visible, recorded the decisions, and recalculated the state as new events arrived.
Evidence boundary
The campaign and customer are anonymized. The observation windows, traffic volume, spend, and attribution window are not publicly disclosed. The comparison is an observation, not proof that the rules alone caused the change, and no identical result is promised.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is the case result guaranteed?+
No. It documents one anonymized operating case and its measured values.
Were the metric bars placed on one common scale?+
No. Each metric pair is scaled within its own unit; the exact before and after values are the evidence.
ARBINEURO
Compare this method with your campaign
Review your baseline, available dimensions, rule conditions, and control points with the team.
Book a demo ↗