Confidential · Prepared for Ledisa · 1 of 8

360° Google Ads
Growth Audit

A full diagnostic of both Google Ads accounts, measured against Triple Whale as the source of truth, benchmarked against the competitive field — with a prioritized plan to protect today's revenue and unlock the next stage of growth.

Prepared by Carlos Carrero Date June 12, 2026 Accounts 490-426-9299 (Search) · 554-162-7821 (PMax & Shopping) Windows 30 / 90 days to Jun 10 · attribution 14 days
01Executive Summary

A strong engine with three structural risks.

Ledisa is a ~$4.9M/month business (90-day run rate, Triple Whale) built on one dominant acquisition channel. Google Ads is the second-largest channel and — per Triple Whale — the most efficient paid dollar in the mix. But it is being throttled by its own measurement, it carries real ad-policy exposure, and the whole category is under regulatory pressure. The plan: fix tracking, defuse policy risk, then scale.

$14.6M
Revenue · 90d
Triple Whale, all channels
155,282
Orders · 90d
AOV $94.30
1.70
Blended ROAS · 90d
on $8.56M ad spend
77%
Spend on AppLovin
single-network concentration
2.05
Google ROAS · Triple Whale
best paid channel (14d, deduplicated)
42%
Conversion capture
Google tag vs Triple Whale google orders
Critical · Risk

Ad-policy exposure on a $13.3K/day program

21 active ads limited for Clickbait, 2 disapproved with Prescription Drug / Restricted Drug Terms flags, and 92 of 98 active Search ads land on an advertorial domain — in a category where the FDA has issued 85 warning letters about GLP-1 marketing. A policy sweep could turn the account off overnight. Fixing this comes first. Details on the Search page →

Critical · Growth

Google under-reports itself — and underbids because of it

Google's tag captures only ~42% of the orders Triple Whale credits to Google (13% on brand search). Smart Bidding sees half the truth, bids timidly, and gives up 64% of impression share on rank — while Triple Whale measures Google's non-brand CPA at $31.49 against a $60 target. Fixing tracking is the single biggest growth lever. How we measured this →

High

77% of spend rides one network

AppLovin took $6.62M of the $8.56M 90-day budget and demonstrably creates brand demand (its daily spend moves together with brand searches, r = 0.68). It is also the least efficient channel on last-click (0.77). Part of that is by design — high order volume that may include subscription starts — but the concentration itself is a business risk. Demand Gen page →

High

YouTube / Demand Gen was never actually tested

The only attempt spent $1,297 over 14 days (Nov 2025) — 7 of 8 campaigns never served an impression. There is no evidence for or against the channel. We propose a real, measurable test plus two full campaign builds. Proposals →

High

The category is renaming away from "GLP-1" — Ledisa hasn't

Kind, Gentle and Patched have all repositioned to berberine-first naming. The FDA states there are no approved GLP-1 patches, and a consumer law firm is running ads to recruit purchasers of dopamine patches — a product Ledisa sells. Compliance repositioning is brand insurance for both ad accounts. Full competitive analysis →

Strength

The foundations are genuinely good

Disciplined exact-match build (75.6% of spend), 84% of keywords at Quality Score 7+, clean single-purchase conversion setup, zero product-feed waste, and brand campaigns returning $11.28 per dollar on Triple Whale last-click. This program is throttled, not broken.

02Business Context · Triple Whale

An AppLovin-first business where Google is the efficiency engine.

Every business metric below comes from Triple Whale. Google Ads platform numbers are used only for auction mechanics — impression share, Quality Score, bids and budgets.

Where the $8.56M went — 90 days

Triple Whale blended ad spend by channel · Mar 13 – Jun 10, 2026

What each dollar returned — 14 days

Triple Whale attributed revenue ÷ spend · deduplicated across channels · May 28 – Jun 10

How to read the two attribution models

Last click gives the whole order to the final ad the customer clicked before buying — it rewards channels that close sales. Linear splits the order value evenly across every ad touch in the customer's journey — it rewards channels that participate early. When a channel's linear number is much higher than its last-click number (AppLovin: $1.24M vs $0.80M), that channel is starting journeys other channels finish. Google scores well on both — it both creates and closes.

Read: Google is under-invested relative to its efficiency.

On deduplicated Triple Whale attribution, Google returns 2.05 (last click) to 2.46 (linear) per dollar — versus AppLovin at 0.77–1.20, Meta at 1.20–1.64 and Taboola at 0.71–1.93. The mix isn't "wrong" — a demand-creation channel shouldn't be judged on last click alone — but the efficiency gap plus the 77% concentration argues for shifting marginal dollars toward Google capture and building a second demand-creation channel (Demand Gen page).

03Business Model · Recurring Revenue

A repeat-revenue business — judge channels on lifetime value, not first-order return.

Ledisa's economics look like a subscription/replenishment business: a higher first-order CPA is acceptable when the same customer keeps paying month after month. That changes how each channel should be judged.

52.2%
Returning-customer orders · 90d
Triple Whale: only 47.8% of orders are new customers
$115.31
New-customer CPA · 90d
vs blended CPA — the gap is repeat revenue
2.57
LTV ÷ CPA
Triple Whale lifetime-value ratio
$94.30
AOV · 90d
vs $42.95 list price — bundles & multi-packs

Limitation found: Triple Whale cannot currently split subscription vs one-time orders for this store

We checked. Triple Whale's subscription metrics come from its Recharge integration, which shows only 2 active subscriptions — clearly not the real recurring base for a store with 52% returning-customer orders. Recurring billing almost certainly runs through the external checkout (CheckoutChamp), outside Shopify's subscription apps, so Triple Whale can't see it as "subscriptions" — only as repeat orders. Recommendation: export subscription status from CheckoutChamp (or tag orders in Shopify) so new-vs-recurring revenue can be split per channel. Until then, the honest proxies are the returning-customer share and LTV/CPA above.

What this means for channel judgment

AppLovin's low last-click return (0.77) is partially defensible if its orders are disproportionately new-customer subscription starts that compound over the following months. The same logic applies to scaling Google: a $60 target CPA against a $115 new-customer CPA and a 2.57 LTV/CPA ratio suggests there is headroom to bid for growth once tracking is repaired — the business earns back acquisition cost over time. Verifying the subscription mix per channel (above) turns this from a hypothesis into a budget rule.

04Account-Level Settings Check

Settings hygiene: clean where it matters most.

SettingSearch accountPMax & Shopping accountVerdict
Auto-apply recommendations0 enabled0 enabledClean — Google is not auto-changing anything
Auto-tagging (GCLID)OnOnCorrect — the click ID exists; it gets lost later in the landing-page hop (see Search page)
Conversion actions1 primary: Purchase (server-side GTM), data-driven attribution1 primary: Purchase (server-side GTM)Clean single-primary setup; no duplicate counting
Optimization score79.7%70.4%Informational only — do not chase this metric
Enhanced ConversionsNot detected on the purchase tagGap — hashed-email matching would recover part of the lost conversions
Next →Search Account Deep-Dive