The ROAS your margin demands, in one table
The same ROAS can make one business money and quietly cost another. The difference is gross margin and returns, and it fits in one table.
The campaign hit its target every month. The business lost money on every sale it brought in.
Both statements can be true at once, because a ROAS target says nothing on its own. A 4x return on ad spend is comfortably profitable for one business and a slow leak for another. What decides which one you are is not the ad platform. It is your gross margin, and how much of what you sell comes back.
Here is the economics of why
Every dollar of attributed revenue carries a cost of goods. What is left is gross profit, and the ad spend has to come out of that, not out of revenue.
So the advertising pays for itself at exactly one point: when the gross profit on the revenue it brought in equals what it cost. Written as a ratio, that point is 1 divided by the gross margin. At 40% margin, break-even ROAS is 2.5x. At 20%, it is 5x. Anything below that line is revenue bought at a loss, however healthy the number looks on the dashboard.
Returns move the line further. A refunded order shows up in the platform's revenue, but the money goes back. If 20% of revenue is refunded, you only keep margin on the other 80%, and the break-even point rises by a quarter.
Read the rest of this piece
Subscribe to The Marketing Economist: marketing and paid media through an economics lens. The full article opens right here, along with every other one on this site. New issues arrive about once a month.
The table
Find your gross margin on the left and your return rate across the top. The number in the cell is the lowest ROAS at which your advertising stops losing money. Outlined cells are where a 4x target would not cover its own cost.
| Gross margin | Share of revenue returned → | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | 10% | 20% | 30% | |
| 10% | 10.0x | 11.1x | 12.5x | 14.3x |
| 15% | 6.7x | 7.4x | 8.3x | 9.5x |
| 20% | 5.0x | 5.6x | 6.2x | 7.1x |
| 25% | 4.0x | 4.4x | 5.0x | 5.7x |
| 30% | 3.3x | 3.7x | 4.2x | 4.8x |
| 35% | 2.9x | 3.2x | 3.6x | 4.1x |
| 40% | 2.5x | 2.8x | 3.1x | 3.6x |
| 45% | 2.2x | 2.5x | 2.8x | 3.2x |
| 50% | 2.0x | 2.2x | 2.5x | 2.9x |
| 55% | 1.8x | 2.0x | 2.3x | 2.6x |
| 60% | 1.7x | 1.9x | 2.1x | 2.4x |
| 65% | 1.5x | 1.7x | 1.9x | 2.2x |
| 70% | 1.4x | 1.6x | 1.8x | 2.0x |
Break-even ROAS = 1 / (gross margin × (1 − return rate)). Assumes refunded revenue earns nothing and ignores return shipping and handling, which push the line higher still. Before overhead, fees and the cost of running the account. Illustrative calculation, not a benchmark.
Reading it
Three bands matter.
Under 3x (light cells). High margins and few returns. Here the risk runs the other way: a target set too high. A business at 60% margin that holds out for 5x turns away sales that would have been profitable at 2x.
3x to 4x. The middle of the table, and the most dangerous place to use a round-number target. Small changes in margin or returns move you across the line without the dashboard showing anything different.
Above 4x (outlined). Thin margins, heavy returns, or both. A 4x target here is a monthly loss that reports as a success. The fix is rarely a better campaign. It is a target set from the margin up, or a price and product mix that leaves more margin to spend.
A worked example
Two stores spend $10,000 each and both report 4x ROAS: $40,000 of attributed revenue.
| Store A | Store B | |
|---|---|---|
| Gross margin | 45% | 25% |
| Returns | 10% | 20% |
| Revenue kept after refunds | $36,000 | $32,000 |
| Gross profit on that revenue | $16,200 | $8,000 |
| Ad spend | $10,000 | $10,000 |
| Left after advertising | $6,200 | −$2,000 |
Same platform, same ROAS, same report. One store made $6,200 before overhead. The other paid $2,000 for the privilege of growing.
What to do with it
Set the target from the table, not from habit. Take your break-even ROAS, then add the margin you need to cover overhead and profit, and that is the floor the campaign has to clear. For a finer view, measure profit directly: POAS (profit on ad spend) puts gross profit over ad spend, so break-even is simply 1.
The campaign that hit its target every month was never lying. It was answering a question nobody had asked it: whether the revenue was worth buying.