Performance snapshot — Kannauj
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 | 5 |
| Leads (Instant Form) | 923 |
| Spend | ₹36,503.02 |
| Cost per lead (blended) | ₹39.55 |
| Best campaign | ₹8.88 |
| Worst campaign | ₹313.85 |
| Impressions | 1,453,265 |
| Reach | 358,803 |
| Frequency | 4.1 |
| 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 Kannauj
Five campaigns ran in Kannauj. Two carried almost everything: 742 leads at ₹28.22 and 65 at ₹8.88. Two newer ones sat at ₹113.62 and ₹313.85 and were capped rather than scaled. One mid-range campaign delivered 45 leads at ₹15.83.
The ₹313.85 campaign consumed roughly ₹9,700 for 31 leads. That is more than a quarter of the account's spend producing about 3% of its leads. Left running unchecked, it would have dragged the blended figure far higher.
Frequency across the account reached 4.1, which is high. In a market this size the audience saturates quickly, and that is usually the point where cost per lead starts drifting regardless of what else is optimised.
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
- Campaign-level budget capping
- Creative rotation for small-audience markets
- Frequency monitoring
What this market taught us
A blended number can hide a campaign that is burning money. ₹39.55 looks reasonable. The ₹313.85 campaign inside it does not. Always ask for the campaign-level view, not just the account average.
Small markets saturate fast. Frequency hit 4.1 here against 2.1 in Varanasi. In a town this size the same people see the ad repeatedly within weeks, so creative has to rotate faster than in a larger city.
Cap rather than delete. We reduced budgets on the weak campaigns instead of removing them, so they stayed valid as comparison points when the market shifted. A deleted campaign takes its learning with it.
Frequently asked questions
What does a solar lead cost in Kannauj?
₹39.55 blended across 5 campaigns, with the best at ₹8.88 and the worst at ₹313.85.
Why is the spread so wide?
Two campaigns were tests that never found delivery. They were capped rather than scaled, but they still absorbed spend before that decision was made.
How often should creative change in a small market?
Faster than in a large one. Frequency here reached 4.1, meaning the same audience saw the ads about four times on average.
Should I judge an agency on blended cost per lead?
Ask for the campaign-level view as well. A healthy blended figure can contain a campaign costing ten times the average.
Do you work with solar businesses in smaller UP towns?
Yes — Kannauj, Hardoi and Gonda are all documented here with their real numbers, including the ones that did not scale.