.svg)
.svg)
Our ads beat the rest of the account for 15 months straight.
How a hair-fibre brand's account came to run on our creative, lost efficiency when it stopped, and re-signed.
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
.svg)
Hair Illusion sells 100% real-hair fibres for thinning hair, direct to US consumers, in a category dominated by keratin-fibre brands.
When they signed in January 2025 the Meta account was spending around $26k a month for roughly 1,000 orders. The founder's own creative was carrying the account and it topped out around a 2.0 return.
Win delivery against a library the client trusted.
Hair fibres sell on believability. Every ad has to prove the product is undetectable before it can sell anything. Our ads had to win delivery against a working library, on a strict CPA, and keep winning as spend went up.
Statics first, then video, then the funnel.
Statics first. The first direct-response batch went live in April 2025. One static launched that July stayed in the account's top spenders for ten months.
Then video. The waterproof-confidence angle, us-vs-them comparisons, UGC problem-agitation cuts, barber and hairline angles, and whitelisted creator ads.
Own the funnel, not just the ad. We rebuilt the product page, built a dedicated fibres landing page and a founder page, and ran the buying with cost caps so budget could follow the winners.
2.23 against 1.87, on a third of the budget.
Our ads out-returned the rest of the account in every month from June 2025 to August 2026.
Across the first engagement, ads we made took $283k of spend and produced $631k of Meta-attributed revenue: a 2.23 ROAS against 1.87 for everything else, at a 10% lower CPA.
Our share of the budget climbed from 4% in April 2025 to 65% by January 2026. When the engagement wound down the account's return slipped from 2.19 to 1.58, and Hair Illusion re-signed in August 2026.
Win delivery against a library the client trusted.
Hair fibres sell on believability. Every ad has to prove the product is undetectable before it can sell anything. Our ads had to win delivery against a working library, on a strict CPA, and keep winning as spend went up.
Statics first, then video, then the funnel.
Statics first. The first direct-response batch went live in April 2025. One static launched that July stayed in the account's top spenders for ten months.
Then video. The waterproof-confidence angle, us-vs-them comparisons, UGC problem-agitation cuts, barber and hairline angles, and whitelisted creator ads.
Own the funnel, not just the ad. We rebuilt the product page, built a dedicated fibres landing page and a founder page, and ran the buying with cost caps so budget could follow the winners.
2.23 against 1.87, on a third of the budget.
Our ads out-returned the rest of the account in every month from June 2025 to August 2026.
Across the first engagement, ads we made took $283k of spend and produced $631k of Meta-attributed revenue: a 2.23 ROAS against 1.87 for everything else, at a 10% lower CPA.
Our share of the budget climbed from 4% in April 2025 to 65% by January 2026. When the engagement wound down the account's return slipped from 2.19 to 1.58, and Hair Illusion re-signed in August 2026.
We’ve got more.
.svg)
How founder conviction on camera took a womenswear brand from $6,714 a month to a million-dollar month.
How founder ads and an account rebuilt around product drops took a UK womenswear brand to $2M a month.
How ads "so bad you must be good" tripled revenue in month one, then founder video took it to £500k a month.
How we became the creative team an elite account trusts with more budget than anyone else.
How 70 new ads in three months took a $40k-a-month account to $200k a month.
How a hair-fibre brand's account came to run on our creative, lost efficiency when it stopped, and re-signed.
%201.svg)
.svg)
