Comparing Facebook ads from 2015 to now feels like two different platforms

I started running ads back in 2015 for a local boutique in Austin. Back then, you could spend $5 a day and get a solid return with just a basic image and some text. Now, the same budget barely gets you a handful of clicks, and you need video content just to get seen in the feed. The targeting options used to be way simpler too - now there's so many settings it feels like you need a degree to not waste money. I recently ran a test comparing a simple photo ad against a 15 second video for the same product. The video got triple the engagement and half the cost per conversion, even though it looked kind of rough. It really shows how much the algorithm has shifted toward video and away from static posts. Has anyone else noticed their old strategies just don't work the same way anymore?

2 comments

2 Comments

nancys906h ago

The part about video ads getting triple the engagement even when they look rough really surprised me. I always thought you needed fancy editing to make video work, but I guess the algorithm just wants any video at all.

wesleyjohnson5h ago

That's an interesting take but honestly the whole "video always wins" thing gets way overstated. A well-aimed static ad with the right copy can still crush video in the right niche, especially for things like books or software where visuals don't add much. The idea that the algorithm just wants "any video at all" is plain wrong, it wants good video specifically, and pushing out crappy content just trains the system to show you to less interested people.