Headline, in one sentence — with its interval:
headline result incl. credible intervalEvery ROAS with its interval and its evidence tier — never a bare number.
| Channel | ROAS [80% interval] | Evidence tier | Recommended action |
|---|---|---|---|
| ________ | ____ [ ____ – ____ ] | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ____ [ ____ – ____ ] | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ____ [ ____ – ____ ] | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ____ [ ____ – ____ ] | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ____ [ ____ – ____ ] | ________ | ________ |
| ________ | ____ [ ____ – ____ ] | ________ | ________ |
Evidence tiers — Validated: consistent with experimental results (geo lift, RCT); act with confidence. Narrow, unvalidated: precise but never tested; reasonable for moderate budget changes — design validation tests. Wide, unvalidated: uncertain and untested; avoid major budget moves — prioritize experiments here, where testing has the highest information value.
Action vocabulary — Strong, consider increasing · Maintain current levels · Uncertain, recommend geo-test · Likely unprofitable, review · Reduce or eliminate.
Honest attribution names the evidence that would revise it.
The next experiment, already designed (see its pre-registration memo):
Decision it updates: if the test reads readout a we will action a; if it reads readout b we will action b.
Every number on this page carries its interval. A point estimate without uncertainty is not a decision input: an optimizer fed point estimates alone will pile budget onto whichever channel is most flattered by noise. Where an interval is too wide to act on, the action is an experiment, not a guess.