Meta's Cost per Result Goal Strategy

Summary

The meeting focused on the new "cost per result goal" bidding strategy released by Meta for Facebook Ads.
The presenter detailed how the feature works, its pros and cons, and gave recommendations for when to use it.
Key considerations such as campaign suitability, risk of reduced spend and conversions, and business fit were discussed.
No group decisions or action items were agreed on, as the meeting was informational.

(No action items were specified in the transcript.)

Meta has introduced the "cost per result goal" as a new bidding strategy for Facebook Ads, available at the ad set level.
This strategy lets advertisers set a target (not a cap) for their desired cost per lead, sale, or other outcome.
Unlike previous cost or bid cap methods, this simplifies the setup and is more user-friendly.

The cost per result goal is a target for Meta's algorithm, not a guarantee or maximum limit. It helps Meta optimize spend towards that goal but may exceed it in some cases.
Setting the goal unrealistically low will likely stop ad delivery or drastically reduce spend (ads may not run if the goal isn’t achievable).
The main benefit: If costs rise seasonally or during periods that are unprofitable, spend is automatically reduced or paused.
The feature replaces cost and bid caps and works best when the business knows its allowable cost per conversion (e.g., cost per lead, cost per sale).

Suitable for lower-funnel campaign objectives (leads, purchases) where a business knows its acceptable cost per conversion.
Less recommended for upper-funnel objectives (traffic, landing page views), as value per click/view can vary widely and could unnecessarily throttle valuable traffic.
Not available on all campaign objectives—availability depends on the campaign setup.

Using this strategy may lead to lower overall ad spend and fewer conversions, even if more profitable per conversion.
Reduced spend and conversions can slow down the learning phase, making it take longer for campaigns to optimize.
Less spend means less conversion data for both Meta's AI and manual optimization.
Agencies or hands-on advertisers who monitor and adjust campaigns frequently may see less benefit; "set and forget" advertisers may find it more useful.

The agency does not often use the strategy unless tight cost control is essential, due to the risk of slower learning and lost optimization opportunities.
The strategy is more attractive for advertisers who cannot monitor campaigns closely or need to strictly control costs to preserve thin margins.
Testing the new feature is encouraged, especially if business constraints fit the intended use case.