Where the budget went, and what it actually moved.
A consolidated read on every LinkedIn and Meta campaign run from launch through June 5 — spend, reach, traffic, and the lead question.
REPORTING WINDOW Nov 16 2025 — Jun 5 2026ACCOUNT Monolith APAC (¥)PLATFORMS LinkedIn · MetaCURRENCY JPY
01
The headline
02
Where the money went
Total investment split by platform, then by individual campaign. LinkedIn carried the overwhelming majority of spend; Meta ran lean by comparison.
03
Spend by objective
What we were paying the platforms to do. The awareness investment did double duty — building brand presence with named enterprise accounts and generating all six leads, at an efficient cost per lead.
Where the leads came from
Our awareness campaign was the real lead engine — six leads at ¥19,859 each, more efficient than the dedicated lead-gen budget.
04
Top-performing campaigns
Ranked across both platforms. Click a column header to re-sort. "Site clicks" = clicks that actually reached the website (LinkedIn landing-page clicks + Meta landing-page views).
05
Top-performing creatives
The individual ads doing the work. The ABOS results-led angles and the XR traffic posts punched far above their spend.
06
Driving traffic to the website
The clearest efficiency story in the whole account: Meta delivered website visits for a fraction of LinkedIn's cost.
07
The lead question
6LEADS GENERATED
All six leads came through the MonoMark awareness campaign — at ¥19,859 each, a more efficient cost per lead than the dedicated lead-gen budget delivered. Awareness was doing the conversion work.
Lead acquisition timeline · source origin: API
What's working — and how to build on it
08
Who actually saw the ads
A quality signal worth keeping: LinkedIn put the brand in front of named enterprise accounts across APAC. The targeting was sound — the conversion path was not.