Evaluating Campaign Effectiveness Across Channels and Locations (tier 1

and tier 2 cities): A Data-Driven Approach to Maximize ROMI

Chapter 1: Introduction
In the dynamic and competitive contemporary marketplace, businesses must strategically
deploy their marketing resources to drive optimal returns. Understanding the complex
interplay between marketing channels, geographic locations, and campaign performance is
crucial for maximizing return on investment (ROMI). This study delves into these factors,
conducting a thorough analysis of marketing initiatives across various digital channels
(including social media, search engines, banner advertisements, and influencer marketing). It
further examines the differential performance of these campaigns across tier 1 and tier 2 cities
within India.
This research tackles a pivotal challenge faced by marketers worldwide: how to effectively
allocate budgets across both channels and locations to yield the best outcomes. By employing
a data-driven approach, this study aims to shed light on the nuanced variations in campaign
success based on these critical parameters.
Objectives
The primary objectives of this study are as follows:
 Conduct a comprehensive analysis of ROMI across diverse marketing channels,
providing valuable insights into channel-specific effectiveness.
 Evaluate the impact of geographic location by comparing campaign performance
between tier 1 and tier 2 cities.
 Discover the optimal combinations of channel and location to maximize ROMI,
informing targeted marketing strategies.
 Provide actionable recommendations to guide future decision-making, empowering
businesses to optimize their marketing spend across channels and locations.
Scope
This research leverages a rich dataset of marketing metrics, including spending, impressions,
clicks, leads, orders, revenue, and other crucial data points. The analysis will delve into how
these metrics fluctuate across channels and locations, with a particular emphasis on the
comparison between tier 1 and tier 2 cities. While the core findings are directly applicable to
the rapidly evolving Indian market, the insights gleaned from this study may hold relevance
for understanding channel-based optimization strategies in other global contexts as well.

Chapter 2: Review of Literature

Marketing Effectiveness
Marketing effectiveness refers to the ability of marketing initiatives to achieve their
objectives and deliver desired outcomes. It encompasses various metrics such as reach,
engagement, conversion rates, and ultimately, financial returns. Measuring marketing
effectiveness enables businesses to assess the performance of their campaigns and allocate
resources efficiently.
Scholars such as Kotler and Keller (2016) emphasize the importance of continuously
evaluating marketing strategies to ensure alignment with organizational goals and market
dynamics. They advocate for a comprehensive approach to assessing effectiveness, taking
into account both quantitative metrics and qualitative factors such as brand perception and
customer satisfaction.
ROMI and Marketing
Return on Marketing Investment (ROMI) is a critical metric for evaluating the financial
impact of marketing efforts. It quantifies the revenue generated relative to the resources
invested in marketing activities. Understanding ROMI enables marketers to prioritize
initiatives that deliver the highest returns and optimize resource allocation across channels.
Research by Ambler and Roberts (2008) highlights the challenges associated with accurately
measuring ROMI, including the attribution of sales to specific marketing activities and the
long-term effects of brand building. They propose methodologies for calculating ROMI and
stress the importance of integrating financial data with marketing analytics to obtain a holistic
view of performance.
Multi-channel Marketing and Omnichannel Marketing
Multi-channel marketing involves engaging with customers across multiple channels, such as
social media, email, websites, and physical stores. Omnichannel marketing takes this concept
further by providing a seamless and integrated experience across all channels, ensuring
consistency and continuity in customer interactions.
Authors like Strauss and Frost (2017) underscore the advantages of omnichannel marketing
in enhancing customer experience and driving loyalty. They discuss strategies for integrating
channels and leveraging data to personalize marketing efforts, thereby increasing engagement
and conversion rates.
Location-Based Marketing and Geo-Targeting
Geo-targeting technologies enable precise targeting, allowing marketers to deliver relevant
content to consumers based on their location, preferences, and behavior. Studies by Dholakia
et al. (2010) explore the effectiveness of location-based marketing in driving foot traffic to
physical stores and increasing salesStudies by Dholakia et al. (2010) explore the effectiveness
of location-based marketing in driving foot traffic Chapter 3: Research Methodology
As a consequence, the objective of this comprehension is to broaden the study of the
efficiency of ads appearing on Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Google, and Banner. The
study is expected to use a broad-based dataset comprising 308 advertisement campaigns of
different types from Kaggle to find facts applying to the KPIs as impression clicks, orders
and sales revenue.
DATA COLLECTION:
The data is collected from the third part data provider named KAGGLE with the usability
score of 10. This data includes a total of 308 advertisements run across Instagram, Facebook,
Google, YouTube, and Banner. With detailed information including:
1.Campaign name description of the campaign
2.Date of the spending of the marketing budget
3.Category type of marketing source
4.Campaign id unique identifier
5.Impressions number of times the ad has been shown
6.Marketing budget money spent on this campaign on this day
7.Clicks how many people signed up and left their credentials
8.Orders how many people paid for the product
9.Revenue how much money we earned
To test the hypothesis, event study methodology is used in the following manner I have
calculated the following:
1. Calculation of ROMI return on marketing investment which tells how effective is
marketing campaign, this metric shows effectiveness of every rupee spent.
It is calculated by (Total earning (i.e revenue)- the marketing cost)/ marketing cost.
2. Calculation of Click trough rate (CTR) which is the percentage of people who clicked at
the banner which is calculated by (Clicks/Impressions).
3.Cost per click (CPC) which tells how much it costs to attract 1 click which is generally on
average, which is calculated by (Marketing spending/Clicks).
4. Cost per lead (CPL) which tells us how much it costs us to attract 1 lead which is usually
on average, CPL is calculated by (Marketing Spending/Leads).
5.Customer acquisition cost (CAC) which tells how much it costs to attract 1 order which is
usually on average, CAC is calculated by (marketing spend/orders).
6.ROMI- return on marketing investment is the most important metric and it is used as the
ultimate way to evaluate if the campaign is good or bad.
Methodology:
Comparative Analysis
Conducting a comparative analysis is required in order to assess the effectiveness of
marketing campaigns. This includes data acquisition and analysis on the different elements of
the campaigns, whether on the platforms used and the types of campaign, to name a few.
undefined
1. ROMI (Return on Marketing Investment):This performance metric enables businesses to
estimate their profits by factoring in the revenue they get from a campaign and the expense of
running the campaign.
2. Key Performance Indicators (KPIs):These are a set of specific key performance indicators
that are used to judge the effectiveness of marketing campaigns. The examples may be
website traffic, conversion rate, and customer acquisition cost.
Through the study of such aspects, it is possible for marketers to reach the point where the
most appropriate channels and campaign types will be employed for the specific audience
they are targeting.
for the comparative analysis done from the data the graphical representation of the revenue
over marketing spent of different advertisements across different platforms is:

25000000

20000000

15000000
Sum of marketing spent
Sum of revenue
10000000

5000000

0
banner facebook google instagram youtube

 Instagram: Stands out with the highest revenue generation of Rs.11023038 while
requiring a effective marketing spend of Rs.7875125.34. which indicates that tough
Instagram is bringing revenue it also demands investment in the marketing efforts put.
 YouTube follows with revenue amounting to Rs.15311433 surpassing Instagram but
has a relatively lower marketing spend of Rs.4057936.51 which also tells that
YouTube might be an effective platform for revenue generation compared to its
marketing costs.
 Facebook has generated Rs.6696870 in revenue, but it’s notable that it required the
highest marketing spend among all the channels totalling to Rs.10157626.74, which
indicates that Facebook may have scope for revenue but in return it also demands a
significant investment in marketing to achieve it.
 Banner ads have bought in Rs.6152960 in revenue while the marketing spend
associated is Rs5025742.77. this suggests that a relatively balanced return on
investment compared to other channels.
 Google has generated Rs.3705065 in revenue with a marketing spend of
Rs.3454149.36 similar to banner ads, this indicates a relatively balanced return on
investment.

In overall , while the Instagram has shown the highest revenue generation, it also
demands substantial marketing investment, YouTube appears to be a particularly
 effective platform for revenue generation relative to marketing costs. Facebook,
although brings in the revenue but in return requires a significant marketing
expenditure. Google and banner ads show relatively balanced return on investment
compared to other channels.
The graphical representation of conversion rate of different advertisements across different
platforms:
From the data it represents that the conversion rates for different marketing channels as
percentages. The conversion rate is typically represented as percentage. This percentage
reflects the proportion of users who took a desired action, that includes making purchase,
filling out a form, or signing up for a service out of the total number of users who were
exposed to your marketing efforts like clicks, leads, and impressions.
 Banner: the conversion rate for the banner channel is 100% which means that every
user who interacted with the banner ads took the desired action.
 Facebook: The conversion rate for the Facebook channel is 336.93% which indicates
that on an average each user who interacted with Facebook ads resulted I
approximately 3.37 conversions. This is a very higher rate of conversion that suggests
Facebook might be particularly effective at driving desired actions compared to other
channels.
 Google: The Google conversion rate is 146.80% which paves that on an average each
user who interacted with Google ads resulted in approximately 1.47 conversions.
 Instagram: The conversion rate for the Instagram is 193.65% which is similar to the
Facebook with this high rate of conversion the data suggests that Instagram ads are
highly effective at driving desired actions among users.
 YouTube: Conversion rate for the YouTube channel is 136.27% which indicates that
on an average each and every user who interacted with the YouTube ads resulted in
approximately 1.36 conversions.

Total
400.00%

350.00%

300.00%

250.00%
Total
200.00%

150.00%

100.00%

50.00%

0.00%
banner facebook google instagram youtube

From the Data and the interpretations it is clear that Facebook and Instagram stand out with
exceptionally high conversion rates, potentially indicating that these platforms are more
 suited for reaching and engaging with the targeted audience.
Comparatively channels like Google and YouTube are also demonstrating solid conversion
rates but might not be as much effective as Facebook and Instagram in converting the users
who are interacting with the advertisement.
Regression Analysis
Another way of analyzing marketing effectiveness is using regression analysis. This
techniques imply investigating the association between amounts of marketing spending and
different performance determiners, including the factors that may affect the effectiveness of
the campaign such as platforms allocation.
Will some types of campaigns prove to be better than the rest?
HYPOTHESIS:
H1: Revenue of an ad campaign across different channels depends on the money spent for
marketing, Clicks, Orders, and Impressions.
Framework:
Dependent Variables: Revenue
Independent Variables:
1. Impressions
2. Marketing spent
3. Clicks
4. Leads
5. Orders
The dependent and independent variables are the same across all the different channels.
(Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Google and banner).

Regression:
Regression Output for Banner ads:
SUMMARYOUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.857227961
R Square 0.734839777
Adjusted R Square 0.725632825
Standard Error 0.450815866
Observations 27

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 5 81.10453834 16.22090767 79.81357582 9.30416E-40
Residual 144 29.26583203 0.203234945
Total 149 110.3703704

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -0.044207737 0.291075743 -0.151877091 0.879496456 -0.619540794 0.53112532 -0.619540794 0.53112532
impressions 0.520537792 0.071278491 7.302873379 1.76319E-11 0.379650504 0.661425079 0.379650504 0.661425079
marketing spent 0.184404453 0.065909783 2.797831285 0.005849135 0.054128819 0.314680087 0.054128819 0.314680087
clicks 0.194044406 0.076277599 2.543923906 0.012016165 0.043276007 0.344812806 0.043276007 0.344812806
leads 0.032439484 0.065685836 0.493858122 0.622158828 -0.097393503 0.16227247 -0.097393503 0.16227247
orders 0.115741407 0.071841109 1.611074891 0.10935318 -0.026257938 0.257740752 -0.026257938 0.257740752
Dependent Variables: Revenue
Independent Variables:
1. Impressions
2. Marketing spent
3. Clicks
4. Leads
5. Orders
Output analysis:
1. R-squared value: 73.48%. This means that 73.48% of variability in dependent variable is
described by the independent variable.
2. Standard Error: 0.45. It is the average difference between observed and predicted
values/variables. In this it is accepted as it should be close to zero and unbiased signs is
considered.
3. DF=N-1; 6-1=5. There are 5 variables, hence it is 6-1=5
4. Significant: 9.30415529993007E-40. Hence the model is significant at F value lower than
5%.
5. Regression Equation:
Revenue = 0.52 impression+0.18 marketing spent+0.19Clicks+0.03leads+0.11orders-0.04421
It shows that with 0.52 increase in A, there will be 1 unit increase in dependent variable.
Same goes for B,C,D and E.
Regression Output for YouTube ads:
SUMMARYOUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.835164831
R Square 0.697500294
Adjusted R Square 0.686996832
Standard Error 0.456753915
Observations 28

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 5 69.27020735 13.85404147 66.40670419 1.13E-35
Residual 144 30.04187598 0.208624139
Total 149 99.31208333

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -0.115364967 0.29490973 -0.391187389 0.696236935 -0.698276187 0.467546252 -0.698276187 0.467546252
impressions 0.375940523 0.072217356 5.205681111 6.54366E-07 0.233197499 0.518683548 0.233197499 0.518683548
marketing spent 0.018943828 0.066777932 0.283683961 0.77706005 -0.113047768 0.150935425 -0.113047768 0.150935425
clicks 0.10799095 0.077282311 1.397356645 0.164455646 -0.044763338 0.260745238 -0.044763338 0.260745238
leads 0.267683258 0.066551036 4.022225257 9.27114E-05 0.13614014 0.399226377 0.13614014 0.399226377
orders 0.250568423 0.072787385 3.442470475 0.0007549 0.106698693 0.394438153 0.106698693 0.394438153

Dependent Variables: Revenue

Independent Variables:
1. Impressions
2. Marketing spent
3. Clicks
4. Leads
5. Orders

Output analysis:
1. R-squared value: 69.75%. This means that 69.75% of variability in dependent variable is
described by the independent variable.
2. Standard Error: 0.456. It is the average difference between observed and predicted
values/variables. In this it is accepted as it should be close to zero and unbiased signs is
considered.
3. DF=N-1; 6-1=5. There are 5 variables, hence it is 6-1=5
4. Significant: 1.1348713869066E-35. Hence the model is significant at F value lower than
5%.
5. Regression Equation:
Revenue=0.375impressions+0.018marketingspent+0.107clicks+0.267leads+0.0.250
orders-0.1153
It shows that with 0.375 increase in impressions, there will be 1 unit increase in dependent
variable. Same goes for marketing spent, clicks, leads and orders.
Regression Output for Instagram ads:
SUMMARYOUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.728754361
R Square 0.531082919
Adjusted R Square
0.514801076
Standard Error 0.169430512
Observations 78

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 5 4.681790978 0.936358196 32.61810818 3.87E-22
Residual 144 4.133764577 0.028706698
Total 149 8.815555556

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -0.22569982 0.109395245 -2.06315936 0.040893523 -0.44192774 -0.00947191 -0.44192774 -0.00947191
impressions 0.100351 0.026788656 3.746025904 0.000259206 0.04740121 0.153300789 0.04740121 0.153300789
marketing spent 0.04514338 0.02477093 1.82243378 0.070463811 -0.00381822 0.094104983 -0.00381822 0.094104983
clicks 0.040590766 0.028667475 1.415917029 0.158959131 -0.01607265 0.097254183 -0.01607265 0.097254183
leads 0.019149175 0.024686764 0.775685919 0.43920651 -0.02964607 0.067944418 -0.02964607 0.067944418
orders 0.061829787 0.027000105 2.28998318 0.0234752 0.008462052 0.115197523 0.008462052 0.115197523

Dependent Variables: Revenue

Independent Variables:
1. Impressions
2. Marketing spent
3. Clicks
4. Leads
5. Orders

Output analysis:
1. R-squared value: 53.18%. This means that 53.18% of variability in dependent variable is
described by the independent variable.
2. Standard Error: 0.169. It is the average difference between observed and predicted
values/variables. In this it is accepted as it should be close to zero and unbiased signs is
considered.
3. DF=N-1; 6-1=5. There are 5 variables, hence it is 6-1=5
4. Significant: 3.87331457370431E-22. Hence the model is significant at F value lower than
5%.
5. Regression Equation:
Revenue = 0.10Impressions+0.045Marketing spent+0.040Clicks+0.019Leads+0.061Orders-
0.2256
It shows that with 0.10 increase in impressions, there will be 1 unit increase in dependent
variable. Same goes for marketing spent, clicks, and leads.
Regression Output for Google ads:
SUMMARYOUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.857227961
R Square 0.734839777
Adjusted R Square 0.725632825
Standard Error 0.450815866
Observations 51

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 5 81.10453834 16.22090767 79.81357582 9.30E-40
Residual 144 29.26583203 0.203234945
Total 149 110.3703704

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept -0.044207737 0.291075743 -0.151877091 0.879496456 -0.619540794 0.53112532 -0.619540794 0.53112532
impressions 0.520537792 0.071278491 7.302873379 1.76319E-11 0.379650504 0.661425079 0.379650504 0.661425079
marketing spent 0.184404453 0.065909783 2.797831285 0.005849135 0.054128819 0.314680087 0.054128819 0.314680087
clicks 0.194044406 0.076277599 2.543923906 0.012016165 0.043276007 0.344812806 0.043276007 0.344812806
leads 0.032439484 0.065685836 0.493858122 0.622158828 -0.097393503 0.16227247 -0.097393503 0.16227247
orders 0.115741407 0.071841109 1.611074891 0.10935318 -0.026257938 0.257740752 -0.026257938 0.257740752

Dependent Variables: Revenue

Independent Variables:
1. Impressions
2. Marketing spent
3. Clicks
4. Leads
5. Orders

Output analysis:
1. R-squared value: 73.48%. This means that 73.48% of variability in dependent variable is
described by the independent variable.
2. Standard Error: 0.45. It is the average difference between observed and predicted
values/variables. In this it is accepted as it should be close to zero and unbiased signs is
considered.
3. DF=N-1; 6-1=5. There are 5 variables, hence it is 6-1=5
4. Significant: 9.30415529993007E-40. Hence the model is significant at F value lower than
5%.
5. Regression Equation:
Revenue= 0.52impressions+0.18marketing spent+0.19clicks+0.03leads+0.11orders-0.04421
It shows that with 0.52 increase in impressions, there will be 1 unit increase in dependent
variable. Same goes for marketing spent, clicks, leads and orders.

Regression Output for Facebook ads:

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.900337
R Square 0.810607
Adjusted R Square 0.802632
Standard Error 0.539381
Observations 105

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 4 118.2936 29.57341 101.6505 1.87E-33
Residual 95 27.63857 0.290932
Total 99 145.9322

Coefficients Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95% Upper 95% Lower 95.0% Upper 95.0%
Intercept 0.421027 0.198635 2.119596 0.036647 0.026686 0.815368 0.026686 0.815368
impressions 0.437075 0.100526 4.347895 3.45E-05 0.237506 0.636643 0.237506 0.636643
marketing spent 0.121825 0.091772 1.327477 0.187532 -0.06037 0.304015 -0.06037 0.304015
clicks 0.131133 0.081082 1.617299 0.10913 -0.02983 0.292101 -0.02983 0.292101
leads 0.21119 0.077089 2.739562 0.007348 0.058149 0.364231 0.058149 0.364231
orders 0.752200 0.054086 1.39073 3.86E-02 0.64474 0.859652 0.644747 0.85965

Dependent Variables: Revenue

Independent Variables:
1. Impressions
2. Marketing spent
3. Clicks
4. Leads
5. Orders

Output analysis:
1. R-squared value: 81.06%. This means that 81.06% of variability in dependent variable is
described by the independent variable.
2. Standard Error: 0.53. It is the average difference between observed and predicted
values/variables. In this it is accepted as it should be close to zero and unbiased signs is
considered.
3. DF=N-1; 6-1=5. There are 5 variables, hence it is 6-1=5
4. Significant: 9.30415529993007E-40. Hence the model is significant at F value lower than
5%.
5. Regression Equation:
Revenue= 0.52impressions+0.18marketing spent+0.19clicks+0.03leads+0.11orders-0.04421
It shows that with 0.52 increase in impressions, there will be 1 unit increase in dependent
variable. Same goes for marketing spent, clicks, leads and orders.
Step-by-Step Process for Calculating Key Metrics
1. Return on Marketing Investment (ROMI):
a. Calculate Total Earnings (Revenue): - Begin by compiling all revenue generated from
orders attributed to the marketing campaign during the specified time frame.
b. Determine Marketing Cost: - Sum up the entirety of marketing expenditures associated
with the campaign, encompassing costs across Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Google, and
Banner ads.
c. Calculate ROMI: - Employ the formula:
ROMI=MarketingCost(TotalEarnings−MarketingCost) - Substantiate this equation by
substituting the values of total earnings and marketing cost to derive the ROMI.
2. Click-Through Rate (CTR):
a. Obtain Clicks and Impressions Data: - Collect data regarding the total number of clicks
generated by the campaign alongside the aggregate number of impressions (views) of the
advertisement banner.
b. Calculate CTR: -
Utilize the formula: =ImpressionsClicks - Perform the computation by dividing the total
number of clicks by the total number of impressions and then multiplying by 100 to express
the result as a percentage.
3. Cost per Click (CPC):
a. Determine Marketing Spending and Clicks: - Identify the total marketing expenditure for
the campaign and the corresponding count of clicks generated by the advertisement.
b. Calculate CPC: -
Apply the formula: CPC=ClicksMarketingSpending - Compute the average cost per click by
dividing the total marketing spending by the number of clicks.
4. Cost per Lead (CPL):
a. Identify Marketing Spending and Leads: - Gather data pertaining to the total marketing
spending for the campaign and the quantity of leads (potential customers) generated as a
result of the advertisement.
b. Calculate CPL: - Utilize the formula:
CPL=LeadsMarketingSpending - Determine the average cost per lead by dividing the total
marketing spending by the number of leads.
5. Customer Acquisition Cost (CAC):
a. Obtain Marketing Spend and Orders Data: - Collect information encompassing the total
marketing spend for the campaign and the quantity of orders (purchases) attributed to
customers who interacted with the advertisement.
b. Calculate CAC: - Employ the formula:
CAC=OrdersMarketingSpend - Determine the average customer acquisition cost by dividing
the total marketing spend by the number of orders received.

Results and Discussions

Based on both Comparative analysis and regression output of the analysis of all hypotheses,
the results are as follows:
1. As the result of the comparative analysis of marketing across various platforms, the
conversion rate of person who is involved in an action like filling the form, making a
purchase or opting for enquiry etc is comparatively more effective in Facebook with
336.93%.
2. As the result of the comparative analysis of marketing across various platforms, the
return on marketing investment (ROMI) which tell about the return of the every
penny invested in marketing in terms of Instagram’s revenue which is generated by
Rs.11023038 while requiring a effective marketing spend of Rs.7875125.34
3. From the regression analysis the results of the variability which is how much does the
dependent variable (revenue) is depended on the independent variable which are
clicks, impressions, orders etc. higher the dependency leads to higher revenue to the
company.
Banner-73.48%
YouTube-69.75%
Instagram-53.18
Google ads:73.48
Facebook-81.6%
In this case the variability of google and banner are almost similar which states that the
revenue inflows from these two platforms are depended upon various independent variables.
4. Overall, for the channels who’s ROMI is higher they are more depended on the
independent variables along with these there also also few factors the companies has
to be taken care of like engagement rate, effective channel strategy, clicks,
impressions etc which will then increases the ROMI of other platforms.
Conclusions

In conclusion, this study thoroughly examined and measured the effectiveness of

marketing campaigns across Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, Google, Banner. It
also covers the KPI’s- key performance indicators which tells the effectiveness of
the campaign.

Based on the gaps identified from literature review, hypothesis has been made
which includes Variables like revenue, orders, clicks, impressions, conversion rate

Based on the various variables identified and the hypothesis made, The data has
been collected using a data providing software which consists of 308 marketing
campaigns across digital platforms.

Data collected has been converted into Likert scale for the statistical purposes.
With the converted data, regression analysis has been done using statistical tool
like SPSS.

Findings from Comparative analysis and 5 regression analysis has been identified
and its suggestions have been mentioned in results and discussions section of this
report.
Appendix:
Data tables:

Row Labels Sum of revenue Sum of marketing spent

banner 6152960 5025742.77
facebook 6696870 10157626.74
google 3705065 3454149.36
instagram 11023038 7875125.34
youtube 15311433 4057936.51
Grand Total 42889366 30570580.72

Row Labels %of Conversion Rate

banner 100.00%
facebook 336.93%
google 146.80%
instagram 193.65%
youtube 136.27%
Grand Total

facebook
Row Labels Sum of CPL Sum of CAC Sum of CPC Sum of CTR Average of ROMI Sum of Conversion Rate
Group1 80081.30094 593814.7909 1593.030393 129.5543756 100.00% 31.70962067
facebook_lal 35553.98135 218970.115 613.2605546 25.19273418 100.00% 7.297569301
facebook_retargeting 11451.52278 53015.58641 237.8690647 76.17542891 100.00% 11.83714477
facebook_tier1 18086.19989 149369.1348 382.4093649 13.95000862 100.00% 7.109239086
facebook_tier2 14989.59692 172459.9547 359.4914089 14.23620387 100.00% 5.465667516
Grand Total 80081.30094 593814.7909 1593.030393 129.5543756 31.70962067

Google
Row Labels Sum of CAC Sum of CPL Average of ROMI Sum of CPC Sum of CTR Sum of Conversion Rate
google_hot 107381.7093 15989.42638 100.00% 338.6784425 48.62404333 8.057507982
google_wide 105661.354 10511.21769 -29.98% 232.8858453 12.97525604 5.758208629
Grand Total 213043.0633 26500.64406 571.5642879 61.59929938 13.81571661

instagram
Row Labels Sum of CAC Sum of CPL Sum of CPC Average of ROMI Sum of Conversion Rate Sum of CTR
instagram_blogger 109214.9817 16486.46061 379.7355485 100.00% 9.921312833 27.42331279
instagram_tier1 84221.81537 9867.382029 220.1257341 254.52% 6.634285188 11.2318389
instagram_tier2 78021.33444 2237.627312 51.06180543 -98.81% 1.669643609 12.872574
Grand Total 271458.1315 28591.46995 650.923088 18.22524163 51.5277257

Youtube
Row Labels Sum of CPL Sum of CAC Sum of Conversion Rate Sum of CPC Average of ROMI Sum of CTR
youtube_blogger 11624.44684 58542.04529 12.82444391 270.9305996 100.00% 27.64538518
Grand Total 11624.44684 58542.04529 12.82444391 270.9305996 27.64538518

Referrences:
Helmig, B., & Thaler, J. (2010). On the Effectiveness of Social Marketing—What Do We
Really Know? Journal of Nonprofit & Public Sector Marketing, 22(4), 264–287.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10495140903566698

Kaggle datasets download -d sinderpreet/analyze-the-marketing-spending

Almestarihi, R., Ahmad, A., Frangieh, R., Abu-AlSondos, I., Nser, K & Ziani, A. (2024).
Measuring the ROI of paid advertising campaigns in digital marketing and its effect on
business profitability.Uncertain Supply Chain Management, 12(2), 1275-1284

Sreedharan, J., Subbarayalu, A. V., Kamalasanan, A., Albalawi, I., Krishna, G. G., Alahmari,
A. D., … MacDonald, J. (2024). Key Performance Indicators: A Framework for Allied
Healthcare Educational Institutions. ClinicoEconomics and Outcomes Research, 16, 173–
185. https://doi.org/10.2147/CEOR.S446614

Pandey, N., Nayal, P. and Rathore, A.S. (2020), "Digital marketing for B2B organizations:
structured literature review and future research directions", Journal of Business & Industrial
Marketing, Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 1191-1204. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-06-2019-0283