Scaling paid media for a secured-loan broker
Quarterly recorded leads increased by 631% as the paid-media budget grew by 406%. Media cost per recorded lead fell by approximately 31%.
- Client
- UK secured-loan broker
- Channels
- Meta Ads and Google Ads
- Main comparison
- Q1 2025 and Q3 2026
- Quarterly recorded leads, from 193 to 1,411
- 7.3×
- Approximate media cost per recorded lead
- 31% lower
- Increase in quarterly media spend
- 406%
Lead volume grew faster than media spend between Q1 2025 and Q3 2026. In these platform figures, “recorded leads” means Meta lead submissions plus Google Ads conversions. It does not mean qualified leads, unique prospects or customers. Media costs exclude management fees and other acquisition costs.
Growing the account needed more than cheaper enquiries
The client is a UK secured-loan broker. At the Q1 2025 baseline, Google Ads and Meta Ads recorded 193 lead actions.
By Q3 2026, quarterly media spend had increased by approximately 406% and recorded leads had reached 1,411. That is a useful improvement in volume and media efficiency, but it still leaves a commercial question: could the team quote those enquiries?
WhatConverts provided a separate view of lead sources, quotable status and quoted loan amounts. That made it possible to look beyond the platforms’ cost-per-lead figures and examine the quality of the enquiries reaching the business.
What the account work focused on
Meta lead generation provided volume, search campaigns covered specific loan themes, and lead-quality reporting helped assess what those enquiries were worth to the business.
Build and manage lead volume
Meta lead generation was refreshed as the paid-media account scaled.
Keep search specific
Separate loan themes and search-term exclusions helped focus Google Ads activity.
Check which leads are quotable
WhatConverts added lead-quality context alongside the separate platform totals.
Read more about the campaign work and lead-quality checks
Build volume through Meta Ads
Meta lead generation became the main source of recorded leads, with remarketing running alongside it. Campaigns were refreshed as the account scaled, rather than treating the initial setup as finished work.
Keep search campaigns specific
Google Ads campaigns separated loan themes, including secured loans and homeowner loans. Search provided a route to people actively looking for those products, alongside Meta’s lead-generation activity.
Use poor-quality enquiries to guide exclusions
The September report identified a Google Ads lead-quality problem. Low-quality search terms were excluded on 28 and 29 September. Early October figures were too small to establish a lasting improvement.
Compare leads with quotable leads
Platform totals showed how much activity the campaigns recorded. WhatConverts reporting added the proportion marked quotable and the media cost of generating them. The two views were assessed separately.
The quarterly results
Recorded leads increased by approximately 631% between Q1 2025 and Q3 2026, while media spend increased by approximately 406%. Media cost per recorded lead was approximately 31% lower.
The year-on-year comparison also improved: Q3 2026 recorded about 3.3 times the leads of Q3 2025, at roughly 33% lower media cost per recorded lead.
This was not a smooth fall in cost every quarter. The table shows the rises as well as the improvements.
Source: supplied quarterly Meta Ads and Google Ads figures, Q1 2025–Q3 2026. Recorded lead actions are platform totals, not unique or qualified prospects. Cost changes use rounded source figures and exclude fees. Scroll within a chart on narrow screens; the full table is below.
View all seven quarters of results
| Quarter | Media spend change vs Q1 2025 | Recorded leads | Media cost per lead change vs Q1 2025 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 2025 | 0% (baseline) | 193 | 0% (baseline) |
| Q2 2025 | +134.3% | 369 | +22.5% |
| Q3 2025 | +131.5% | 430 | +3.9% |
| Q4 2025 | +139.8% | 491 | -5.7% |
| Q1 2026 | +231.5% | 954 | -32.9% |
| Q2 2026 | +284.3% | 983 | -24.6% |
| Q3 2026 | +406.5% | 1,411 | -30.7% |
Source: supplied Google Ads and Meta Ads quarterly figures, January 2025 to September 2026. Spend and media cost per lead are shown as percentage changes relative to Q1 2025. Percentages are calculated from the supplied rounded spend and lead counts; actual budgets and unit costs are withheld. October is excluded because it was incomplete.
What the lead-quality reporting added
For September 2026, WhatConverts recorded 624 leads across Meta and Google, of which 450 were marked quotable. Media cost per quotable lead was approximately 21% lower than in August.
- Leads marked quotable in September 2026
- 450
- Media cost per quotable lead, down approximately 21% from August
- 21% lower
Meta supplied 408 of September’s 450 quotable leads. Its media cost per quotable lead fell by approximately 22% from August to September.
Google shows why raw lead volume needs checking: its WhatConverts lead count rose from 53 to 99, but quotable leads stayed at 42. A lower cost per enquiry did not mean more quotable prospects.
Source: the client’s September 2026 performance report, using WhatConverts outcomes against platform spend. Quotable status is the report’s lead-quality measure; it is not a completed loan or a sale. These monthly WhatConverts figures use a different source and period from the quarterly platform comparison.
Quoted loan amounts give context, not revenue
Meta Ads leads accounted for approximately 89% of quoted loan amounts in the supplied WhatConverts summary, covering 1 January to 22 October 2026. Quoted borrowing is not completed lending, broker revenue or profit.
Read more about quoted-loan quality and its limits
The average quoted amount per quotable Meta Ads lead was approximately 17% higher than for Google Ads leads in this summary.
Source: supplied WhatConverts summary, 1 January to 22 October 2026. Percentages are approximate and based on supplied rounded amounts. This measures quoted borrowing amounts, not commission, completion rates or return on ad spend.
How to read these results
- Different systems answer different questions. Platform figures count Meta lead submissions and Google Ads conversions. WhatConverts supplies a separate lead and quotable-status record. The totals are not interchangeable and should not be added together.
- Media efficiency is not full acquisition cost. The media-cost comparisons exclude agency fees and other costs. Completed-loan and revenue data are not included, so this case does not establish customer acquisition cost, profitability or ROAS.
- The comparison shows account performance over time. Budgets, campaigns and market conditions changed. This is a before-and-after account comparison, not a controlled test proving that an individual change caused the outcome.
Do you know which enquiries are worth your budget?
A lower cost per lead is useful when the enquiries suit the business. If your platform reports and sales feedback tell different stories, start by looking at how lead quality is recorded and how that changes your budget decisions.
Explore our financial services PPC approach, or request an audit of your paid-media account.