Performance snapshot — Hardoi
Every figure below is read directly from the ad accounts. Where two accounts ran in this city, they are shown separately rather than merged, because they used different objectives and periods.
| Metric | Performance |
|---|---|
| Campaigns | 1 |
| Leads (Instant Form) | 98 |
| Spend | ₹574.27 |
| Cost per lead | ₹5.86 |
| Daily budget | ₹200 |
| Impressions | 28,525 |
| Reach | 15,207 |
| Frequency | 1.9 |
| Period | Through September 2026 |
Performance figures on this page come from selected campaigns and reporting periods in our portfolio records through September 2026. Several screenshots are filtered views of the same ad account, so totals are calculated from distinct accounts only. Results vary with market, budget, targeting, offer, competition and sales follow-up.
Our work in Hardoi
One campaign, one broad audience, an Instant Form, and ₹574 of total spend. It produced 98 leads at ₹5.86 each — roughly a tenth of what the same category costs in Delhi NCR.
Three things made it that cheap, and none of them are clever. The audience was almost untouched by solar advertising, so the auction was uncontested. Frequency stayed at 1.9, meaning we were still reaching new people throughout. And an Instant Form inside Facebook is a two-tap action, so the barrier to submitting was close to zero.
We did not scale this. Adding budget to a broad-audience form campaign in a town this size pushes frequency up fast, and cost per lead follows. The honest ceiling here is modest.
Campaign screenshots
Client names, campaign names, ad names and creative thumbnails are blurred. Every number to the right of that column is exactly as the platform reported it.
Services used for this work
- Meta Ads — Instant Form lead campaigns
- Small-budget market testing
- Lead quality review with the client's sales team
What this market taught us
₹5.86 is real, and it is not a promise. It came from one campaign, one small market, ₹574 of spend. Quoting it as our standard cost per lead would be dishonest, which is exactly why we publish the ₹63.11 Delhi number on the same site.
Cheap leads move work to the sales team. At this price the lead has given a name and a number after two taps, with no website visit and no real research. Connection rate matters far more than cost per lead here.
Small markets have a low ceiling. The audience is finite. Spending ten times more would not have produced ten times the leads at this price — it would have raised frequency and cost together.
Frequently asked questions
Is ₹5.86 per lead realistic for solar?
It is real — 98 leads from ₹574 in one Hardoi campaign. It is also our single cheapest result, from a small, uncontested market. Our Delhi NCR leads cost ₹63.11 in the same period.
Can this be scaled?
Not far. The audience in a market this size is finite; adding budget raises frequency, and cost per lead rises with it.
Do cheap leads convert?
They need more qualification. We recommend tracking connection rate and site-visit rate alongside cost per lead so you can see what the number is actually buying.
What budget did this run on?
₹200 per day, with ₹574 of total spend in the period shown.
Why publish such a small account?
Because leaving it out would make our averages look more consistent than they are. The range is the useful information.