The four personas · who the engine is for

The four personas, and why we built them this way.

The hardest part of acting on an ad audit isn't getting the findings — it's getting the people around you to act on them. The marketing manager who runs the audit isn't the one who controls the budget. The CEO who controls the budget doesn't read dashboards. The media buyer who has to implement the fixes wants the entity names, not the narrative. The CFO wants the ROI math.

So we generate four versions of every audit. Same findings, same math, four different presentations — one for each stakeholder. Pick the one you need, or get all four. The 3-minute video lands in your inbox, you forward the right one to the right person, and your audit becomes their work product instead of yours.

01 · CEO

The CEO version.

Dollars-first. No jargon.

Length and framing

CEO version: 2–3 minutes. Opens with the dollar amount at stake, names the three highest-impact fixes by their consequence (not their detection key), and ends with what to ask the marketing team this week. Reads like a board update, not a report.

What this version focuses on

Total recoverable waste in dollars, the three highest-impact fixes ranked by recovery size, what to ask the marketing team this week, payback in calendar time.

Sample 30-second excerpt · Lulu Lemonade audit

“Lulu spent thirty thousand on Meta last month. About four thousand of that was wasted on three specific problems. The biggest single one: Meta is over-serving one ad that converts worse than its alternatives — that's eighteen hundred a month, gone. The other two are about eleven hundred and thirteen hundred. None of these are growth bets. They're errors. Three meetings with the marketing team, three weeks, and Lulu frees up fifty thousand dollars a year.”

02 · CMO

The CMO version.

Strategic. Agency-accountable.

Length and framing

CMO version: 3–4 minutes. Frames findings as structural — what the account is doing wrong at a systems level, not what tactic to change tomorrow. Calls out where the agency or in-house team should be pushing back on Meta's defaults, and what to document for the next QBR.

What this version focuses on

Account-structure decisions that compound, where Meta's delivery system is making choices on your behalf, what the agency should own in the next 30 days, how to set up the next re-audit to measure progress.

Sample 30-second excerpt · Lulu Lemonade audit

“Your account has three compounding structural issues. Meta's delivery is concentrating impressions on a single ad whose conversion rate is thirty-one percent below the alternatives — that's a delivery-system trap, not a creative win. Two of your prospecting audiences overlap sixty-three percent — you're paying the auction premium twice. And eighty-four percent of conversions come from one creative, so a fatigue cycle would tank the account. Document what your agency says about each. Re-audit in thirty days.”

03 · Media Buyer

The Media Buyer version.

Technical. Entity-specific.

Length and framing

Media Buyer version: 4–5 minutes. Names the actual ad sets, ads, audiences, and placements involved. Reads like a peer talking — specific entity names, exact thresholds the rule fired at, the precise remediation sequence with check-back dates.

What this version focuses on

Entity names (ad sets, ads, audiences), exact statistical thresholds that fired each rule, the remediation steps in implementation order, what to watch in the 7 days after each fix.

Sample 30-second excerpt · Lulu Lemonade audit

“Three high-confidence findings on Lulu's account. One: the ad set called Prospecting Summer 2026 has a single ad pulling four-point-two-x the impressions of its siblings, but its conversion rate is thirty-one percent below the set average. Duplicate the ad set so Meta re-evaluates each ad from scratch. Two: the LAL 1% and Sparkling-Water Interests audiences overlap sixty-three percent — exclude one from the other so they stop bidding against each other. Three: eighty-four percent of conversions come from one creative. Load three fresh hooks this week.”

04 · CFO

The CFO version.

ROI. Payback. Cash math.

Length and framing

CFO version: 2–3 minutes. Speaks in annualized dollars, payback periods, and the difference between an error and a growth bet. Ends with the math on the subscription itself — how fast the audit pays for itself versus the recoverable waste it surfaces.

What this version focuses on

Annualized recoverable waste, payback period on the subscription cost, distinction between errors and growth investments, how the math scales at higher account counts.

Sample 30-second excerpt · Lulu Lemonade audit

“Roughly four thousand a month, or fifty thousand a year, is being wasted on three statistical inefficiencies the platform doesn't surface on its own. These aren't growth bets or strategic experiments — they're errors. Fixing them costs about three hours of media buyer time and zero dollars in new ad spend. Payback on the Honest Growth subscription, seventy-nine dollars a month, is achieved in week one of implementation. The ROI math doesn't move much at higher account counts.”

On the build schedule · target Q2 2027

One audit, four versions, one stakeholder at a time.

Persona videos ship with the Full Stack plan — the always-on tier built around the Watchtower. Both are in active build, targeted for Q2 2027. One persona will come with each audit, with extra stakeholder versions available as add-ons. Until then, this page is a look at what's coming — not something you can buy yet.

See the sample audit See the roadmap & get notified

Everything you can buy today is on the pricing page.