Introduction
The following framework explains how to interpret metrics used in Paid Sources Traffic Performance Reports.
The goal is to provide clear, consistent grading so performance can be quickly understood, and actions can be tied directly to business impact.
About Score Values
Each score ranges from 0 to 100.
Scores are calculated using uplift modeling, comparing two cohorts:
Shoppers exposed to a paid marketing campaign (e.g., seeing a paid ad).
Organic traffic.
A score of 50 represents equilibrium—no measurable difference between the two cohorts.
Scores above 50 mean the paid marketing produced a positive lift, with the exposed cohort outperforming the control group.
Scores below 50 mean the paid marketing underperformed, with exposed shoppers performing worse than those who were not exposed.
Score Interpretation
Score Value
Score values are interpreted in accordance with the table below:
Score Value | Interpretation | Indicator |
0 - 20 | Very Poor | total non-alignment with the brand potential |
21 - 40 | Poor | results below brand potential |
41 - 60 | Fair | results that should exceed organic traffic performance |
61 - 80 | Good | results exceeding brand potential |
81 - 100 | Excellent | results as good as it gets |
Priorities
In general your BFCM game plan should focus on improving overall and lifecycle stage scores according to the priority schedule below:
Score Value | Priority |
0 - 20 | existential |
21 - 40 | urgent |
41 - 60 | high |
61 - 80 | moderate |
81 - 100 | low |
Share of All Revenue Interpretation
The percentage indicates the level of dependency on paid marketing:
Share of All Revenue | Dependency |
0 - 10% | Very Low |
11% - 20% | Low |
21%- 30% | Moderate |
31% - 50% | High |
51% - 100% | Very High |
Results Interpretation for Paid Marketing Channels
Identify the channel with the highest absolute value of Impact (positive or negative).
Interpret these results as today's paid marketing performance snapshot.
Frame positive outcomes as:
“This campaign resonated strongly with shoppers last BFCM; study its content, audience, and offer mix to guide this year’s strategy.”
Frame negative outcomes as:
“This campaign failed to convert effectively last BFCM; rework its message, timing, or featured products to avoid repeating weak performance.”
This approach ensures that BFCM Week insights feed directly into continuous learning, connecting past campaign performance with current optimization of messaging, creative, segmentation, and personalization strategy.
Lift Analysis
To evaluate BFCM Week performance, we compare scores across two time intervals:
Pre-BFCM Baseline (30 days before BFCM Week)
BFCM Week (Thanksgiving Day through following Wednesday)
Scores are evaluated both at the overall level and across lifecycle-based sub-components (Acquisition, Engagement, Monetization, Retention).
Lift
Lift is defined as the difference between the BFCM Week score and the Pre-BFCM score.
It shows whether the brand improved or declined in performance during BFCM compared to the baseline period.
Comparisons: Today vs. 2024 BFCM Week
Assessment
Engagement Diff. | RPV Diff. | Assessment |
positive | positive | winner - keep it |
positive | negative | mixed metrics - optimize |
negative | positive | mixed metrics - optimize |
negative | negative | loser - fix or cut |