[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":786},["ShallowReactive",2],{"guide-facebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry":3},{"id":4,"title":5,"answer":6,"authorId":7,"body":8,"category":684,"ctaVariant":685,"dataset":684,"description":686,"examples":687,"extension":688,"faqs":689,"heroImage":714,"intro":715,"meta":716,"navigation":717,"path":718,"publishedAt":719,"seo":720,"sources":721,"stats":755,"stem":784,"updatedAt":719,"__hash__":785},"blog\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry.md","Facebook Ads Benchmarks by Industry (2027)","There is no single good Facebook ads benchmark: the right number depends on your campaign objective, your industry, and your margin. WordStream's 2025 study puts the all-industry cost per lead at $27.66, ranging from $3.16 (restaurants) to $76.71 (dental), with the Traffic-objective CPC at $0.70 and the Leads-objective CPC at $1.92, while Gupta Media puts the blended Meta CPM near $8.19. To use the table, match the objective to the right dataset, find your exact vertical row, read cost next to conversion in the same line, and judge against your own break-even, not the blended average.","likit-sae-lee",{"type":9,"value":10,"toc":671},"minimark",[11,16,20,23,26,29,32,35,38,45,49,52,55,353,356,359,362,490,492,495,499,502,505,508,511,571,575,578,587,595,602,610,618,625,631,635,638,641,644,649,652,655,658,662,665,668],[12,13,15],"h2",{"id":14},"how-to-read-the-benchmark-table-before-you-trust-it","How to read the benchmark table before you trust it",[17,18,19],"p",{},"There is no single \"good\" Facebook benchmark, and any page that hands you one number is hiding the part that matters. The honest answer is a range that swings by an order of magnitude depending on three things: the campaign objective you ran, the industry you sell into, and the economics behind the number. WordStream's 2025 study, drawn from 1,280 US campaigns running between April 2024 and June 2025, makes the spread plain. The across-industry average cost per lead was $27.66, but the per-industry figures ran from $3.16 for restaurants and food to $76.71 for dental practices. That is a 24x gap inside one dataset. A blended average tells you almost nothing about your own account.",[17,21,22],{},"So before the table, five rules for reading it. They turn a data dump into a tool.",[17,24,25],{},"First, match the campaign objective to the right dataset. WordStream reports Traffic and Leads as two separate campaign objectives with different numbers, and conflating them is the single most common mistake. A Traffic campaign buys cheap clicks (the all-industry CPC was $0.70); a Leads campaign optimises for form fills and costs more per click ($1.92) because it is chasing a higher-intent action. Compare a Traffic campaign's $0.50 click against a Leads benchmark and you will conclude you are winning when you are reading the wrong column entirely.",[17,27,28],{},"Second, find your exact vertical row, not the blended average. The all-industry line is a centre of gravity for a dataset that contains both restaurants converting at 18.25% and furniture brands converting at 3.77%. Neither of those businesses should ever be judged against the middle. Locate the row that matches what you sell.",[17,30,31],{},"Third, note the attribution window before you judge a single cell. A benchmark built on a 7-day-click-plus-1-day-view window will report fewer conversions, and therefore a higher cost per conversion, than one built on a longer window. If your account runs a different window than the study, the numbers are not directly comparable. This matters more in 2026 than it used to, for reasons covered at the end.",[17,33,34],{},"Fourth, read the cost metric next to the quality metric in the same row. A low cost per lead with a weak conversion rate can still mean expensive customers, because cheap leads that never close are not cheap at all. The whole point of a matrix, rather than five separate single-metric tables, is that you see cost and quality side by side in one line.",[17,36,37],{},"Fifth, judge on a multi-week trend, not a single day. A daily figure is noise. Meta's delivery system re-learns constantly, the auction reprices by the hour, and one bad day proves nothing. Read your metrics as a moving average across at least two or three weeks before you act on them.",[17,39,40],{},[41,42],"img",{"alt":43,"src":44},"A marketer at a laptop comparing two spreadsheets of advertising metrics side by side in a calm modern office","\u002Fimages\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry-reading-the-numbers.webp",[12,46,48],{"id":47},"the-master-benchmark-table-cost-and-quality-by-industry","The master benchmark table: cost and quality by industry",[17,50,51],{},"This is the artifact the rest of the page hangs off. Every figure comes from WordStream's 2025 Facebook Ads benchmark study, which analysed 726 US Leads campaigns and 554 US Traffic campaigns over the April 2024 to June 2025 window, in USD. Because WordStream publishes Traffic and Leads as distinct objectives, there are two tables, and you read the one that matches your campaign.",[17,53,54],{},"The Leads table below is ranked by cost per lead, cheapest to most expensive, so the pattern is visible at a glance. The columns sit together on purpose: a cheap click does not guarantee a cheap lead, and a high conversion rate does not guarantee a low cost, so reading across the row is the whole exercise.",[56,57,58,80],"table",{},[59,60,61],"thead",{},[62,63,64,68,71,74,77],"tr",{},[65,66,67],"th",{},"Industry (Leads objective)",[65,69,70],{},"CTR",[65,72,73],{},"CPC",[65,75,76],{},"Conversion rate",[65,78,79],{},"Cost per lead",[81,82,83,101,118,135,152,168,185,202,219,235,252,269,285,302,319,336],"tbody",{},[62,84,85,89,92,95,98],{},[86,87,88],"td",{},"Restaurants and food",[86,90,91],{},"2.97%",[86,93,94],{},"$0.74",[86,96,97],{},"18.25%",[86,99,100],{},"$3.16",[62,102,103,106,109,112,115],{},[86,104,105],{},"Real estate",[86,107,108],{},"3.75%",[86,110,111],{},"$1.57",[86,113,114],{},"9.53%",[86,116,117],{},"$16.61",[62,119,120,123,126,129,132],{},[86,121,122],{},"Career and employment",[86,124,125],{},"2.81%",[86,127,128],{},"$0.86",[86,130,131],{},"5.77%",[86,133,134],{},"$17.64",[62,136,137,140,143,146,149],{},[86,138,139],{},"Arts and entertainment",[86,141,142],{},"3.92%",[86,144,145],{},"$1.08",[86,147,148],{},"9.34%",[86,150,151],{},"$18.17",[62,153,154,157,160,163,166],{},[86,155,156],{},"Attorneys and legal",[86,158,159],{},"2.11%",[86,161,162],{},"$4.10",[86,164,165],{},"10.53%",[86,167,151],{},[62,169,170,173,176,179,182],{},[86,171,172],{},"Sports and recreation",[86,174,175],{},"3.41%",[86,177,178],{},"$1.07",[86,180,181],{},"5.48%",[86,183,184],{},"$19.30",[62,186,187,190,193,196,199],{},[86,188,189],{},"Education and instruction",[86,191,192],{},"1.86%",[86,194,195],{},"$1.65",[86,197,198],{},"10.08%",[86,200,201],{},"$28.22",[62,203,204,207,210,213,216],{},[86,205,206],{},"Personal services",[86,208,209],{},"1.99%",[86,211,212],{},"$2.08",[86,214,215],{},"6.51%",[86,217,218],{},"$30.57",[62,220,221,224,227,230,232],{},[86,222,223],{},"Industrial and commercial",[86,225,226],{},"2.08%",[86,228,229],{},"$1.80",[86,231,148],{},[86,233,234],{},"$37.34",[62,236,237,240,243,246,249],{},[86,238,239],{},"Furniture",[86,241,242],{},"1.48%",[86,244,245],{},"$2.18",[86,247,248],{},"3.77%",[86,250,251],{},"$40.04",[62,253,254,257,260,263,266],{},[86,255,256],{},"Home and home improvement",[86,258,259],{},"1.94%",[86,261,262],{},"$2.23",[86,264,265],{},"5.22%",[86,267,268],{},"$41.26",[62,270,271,274,277,279,282],{},[86,272,273],{},"Physicians and surgeons",[86,275,276],{},"3.02%",[86,278,262],{},[86,280,281],{},"4.51%",[86,283,284],{},"$47.47",[62,286,287,290,293,296,299],{},[86,288,289],{},"Beauty and personal care",[86,291,292],{},"2.55%",[86,294,295],{},"$3.06",[86,297,298],{},"5.29%",[86,300,301],{},"$51.42",[62,303,304,307,310,313,316],{},[86,305,306],{},"Health and fitness",[86,308,309],{},"1.72%",[86,311,312],{},"$2.64",[86,314,315],{},"5.63%",[86,317,318],{},"$52.98",[62,320,321,324,327,330,333],{},[86,322,323],{},"Dentists and dental",[86,325,326],{},"1.05%",[86,328,329],{},"$9.78",[86,331,332],{},"6.38%",[86,334,335],{},"$76.71",[62,337,338,341,344,347,350],{},[86,339,340],{},"All industries (average)",[86,342,343],{},"2.59%",[86,345,346],{},"$1.92",[86,348,349],{},"7.72%",[86,351,352],{},"$27.66",[17,354,355],{},"Source: WordStream 2025, all figures USD.",[17,357,358],{},"Notice what the row-by-row reading reveals. Dental has a respectable 6.38% conversion rate, better than beauty or health and fitness, yet the most expensive cost per lead in the table at $76.71, because the clicks themselves cost $9.78 each. Restaurants win on every axis at once: cheap clicks, a runaway 18.25% conversion rate, and a $3.16 cost per lead, because the \"conversion\" is usually a low-commitment action like claiming an offer rather than a considered purchase. Two businesses can have the same conversion rate and wildly different customer costs. That is why the matrix exists.",[17,360,361],{},"Now the Traffic objective, which optimises for clicks rather than form fills and therefore reports its own, lower numbers. If you ran a Traffic campaign, this is your table, not the one above.",[56,363,364,375],{},[59,365,366],{},[62,367,368,371,373],{},[65,369,370],{},"Industry (Traffic objective)",[65,372,70],{},[65,374,73],{},[81,376,377,388,399,409,419,428,438,448,458,469,480],{},[62,378,379,382,385],{},[86,380,381],{},"Shopping, collectibles and gifts",[86,383,384],{},"4.13%",[86,386,387],{},"$0.34",[62,389,390,393,396],{},[86,391,392],{},"Travel",[86,394,395],{},"2.76%",[86,397,398],{},"$0.51",[62,400,401,403,406],{},[86,402,172],{},[86,404,405],{},"2.60%",[86,407,408],{},"$0.41",[62,410,411,413,416],{},[86,412,139],{},[86,414,415],{},"2.10%",[86,417,418],{},"$0.49",[62,420,421,423,426],{},[86,422,289],{},[86,424,425],{},"1.81%",[86,427,94],{},[62,429,430,432,435],{},[86,431,88],{},[86,433,434],{},"1.67%",[86,436,437],{},"$0.72",[62,439,440,442,445],{},[86,441,206],{},[86,443,444],{},"1.70%",[86,446,447],{},"$1.00",[62,449,450,452,455],{},[86,451,256],{},[86,453,454],{},"1.28%",[86,456,457],{},"$0.99",[62,459,460,463,466],{},[86,461,462],{},"Finance and insurance",[86,464,465],{},"0.98%",[86,467,468],{},"$1.22",[62,470,471,474,477],{},[86,472,473],{},"Automotive repair and service",[86,475,476],{},"0.80%",[86,478,479],{},"$0.81",[62,481,482,484,487],{},[86,483,340],{},[86,485,486],{},"1.71%",[86,488,489],{},"$0.70",[17,491,355],{},[17,493,494],{},"Two things jump out. Shopping, collectibles and gifts posts the cheapest clicks in the table at $0.34 with the highest click-through rate at 4.13%, a CTR that rose 146% year over year, the standout move in the dataset. Finance and insurance sits at the other end with the priciest clicks ($1.22) and the lowest engagement (0.98% CTR), a vertical where the audience is expensive and slow to tap. Automotive repair has the lowest CTR of all at 0.80%, a reminder that demand-driven categories convert on need, not on scroll-stopping creative.",[12,496,498],{"id":497},"cpm-and-roas-the-two-columns-the-wordstream-tables-leave-out","CPM and ROAS: the two columns the WordStream tables leave out",[17,500,501],{},"WordStream's objective tables report CTR, CPC, conversion rate and cost per lead, but not CPM or ROAS. CPM comes from a separate neutral tracker, and ROAS does not have a clean cross-industry source at all, so both belong in their own section where the sourcing never blurs into the WordStream table.",[17,503,504],{},"For CPM, the cleanest neutral read is Gupta Media's cost tracker, which runs on tens of billions of ad impressions. It put the blended Meta (Facebook and Instagram) CPM at about $8.19 across 2025. The seasonal swing is the headline: Black Friday 2024 averaged $16.85, roughly double the year's baseline, while the quietest month (August 2025) sat near $7.67. CPM is the price of reach, and it is set mostly by the auction and the calendar, not by your industry, which is why it does not slot neatly into the WordStream vertical tables. Plan your budget around the season, not just the average.",[17,506,507],{},"ROAS is the metric where you should be most suspicious of any \"average by industry\" figure, and the honest reason is the sourcing. The cross-industry ROAS numbers that circulate online almost all trace back to ad-tech and attribution-tool vendors aggregating their own customers' accounts, not to a neutral standards body, and a different vendor's panel produces a different number from the same year. So this page deliberately does not print a vertical ROAS table: there is no neutral primary source that would survive an honest audit, and a borrowed vendor band would only give you false precision. What actually decides whether a given ROAS is good is not a published multiple at all. It is your break-even ROAS, which is one divided by your gross margin. A store running a 50% margin breaks even at a 2.0x ROAS, so a 2.5x is profit; a store on a 25% margin breaks even at 4.0x, so the same 2.5x is a loss. The \"good\" line moves with your own economics, which is exactly why a quoted industry average cannot set it for you. The margin math is its own discipline, covered in the ROAS guide linked below.",[17,509,510],{},"What you can anchor to with a neutral source is the conversion rate underneath the ROAS, because that is where ecommerce and lead-gen split apart, and it is covered in the next section.",[56,512,513,526],{},[59,514,515],{},[62,516,517,520,523],{},[65,518,519],{},"Context metric",[65,521,522],{},"Figure",[65,524,525],{},"Source and year",[81,527,528,539,550,561],{},[62,529,530,533,536],{},[86,531,532],{},"Blended Meta CPM (full year)",[86,534,535],{},"$8.19",[86,537,538],{},"Gupta Media 2025",[62,540,541,544,547],{},[86,542,543],{},"Black Friday 2024 CPM",[86,545,546],{},"$16.85",[86,548,549],{},"Gupta Media 2024",[62,551,552,555,558],{},[86,553,554],{},"Retail conversion rate, desktop",[86,556,557],{},"3.7%",[86,559,560],{},"Contentsquare 2026",[62,562,563,566,569],{},[86,564,565],{},"Retail conversion rate, mobile",[86,567,568],{},"2.0%",[86,570,560],{},[12,572,574],{"id":573},"what-moves-each-metric-and-where-to-go-deeper","What moves each metric, and where to go deeper",[17,576,577],{},"The angle of this hub is breadth: cost and quality across every vertical, in one place. The depth on any single metric lives in its own guide. Here is the one-line version of what drives each number, with a pointer to the full argument so nothing is repeated.",[17,579,580,581,586],{},"CPM is the auction price of reach, set by your bid times Meta's estimated action rate times ad quality, then pushed around by season, placement and country. You do not win it by bidding harder; you win it with quality signals and timing. For the full mechanics of why CPM climbs, see the guide on ",[582,583,585],"a",{"href":584},"\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ad-cpm","why Facebook ad CPM is so high",".",[17,588,589,590,594],{},"CTR is a creative and relevance signal. A weak hook in the first frame is the usual cause of a low one, and it is the metric most directly in your hands, because the creative is the lever. The deep version, including link CTR versus CTR (all) and why the formula matters, is in the ",[582,591,593],{"href":592},"\u002Fblog\u002Fgood-ctr-facebook-ads","good CTR for Facebook ads"," guide.",[17,596,597,598,594],{},"CPC is downstream of both, because cost per click is roughly CPM divided by CTR times ten. Fix the CTR or the CPM and the CPC follows; chase the CPC directly and you are treating a symptom. The mechanic and the by-objective medians live in the ",[582,599,601],{"href":600},"\u002Fblog\u002Fgood-cpc-facebook-ads","good CPC for Facebook ads",[17,603,604,605,609],{},"Conversion rate is an offer and landing-page problem, not an ad problem. Once the click lands, message match between the ad and the page, and the strength of the offer, decide whether it converts. How to fix a low rate is the whole subject of the ",[582,606,608],{"href":607},"\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ad-conversion-rate-benchmark","Facebook ad conversion rate benchmark"," guide, so this hub does not reproduce those levers.",[17,611,612,613,617],{},"Cost per lead and cost per acquisition are downstream of everything above, judged against what a customer is worth to you. A benchmark cost per lead is only a starting point; your real ceiling comes from lifetime value, and that math turns a benchmark into a number your margin can carry. The ",[582,614,616],{"href":615},"\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ad-cpa-benchmark","Facebook ad CPA benchmark"," guide owns the lifetime-value method.",[17,619,620,621,594],{},"ROAS is judged against break-even, which is one divided by your margin, never a fixed multiple someone quotes you. A 2x ROAS is profitable for a 60% margin brand and a loss for a 40% one. The break-even framing, and the difference between ROAS and ROI, is the subject of the ",[582,622,624],{"href":623},"\u002Fblog\u002Fgood-roas-facebook-ads","good ROAS for Facebook ads",[17,626,627],{},[41,628],{"alt":629,"src":630},"A phone held in one hand showing a vertical product video mid scroll, thumb paused over the screen, warm natural light","\u002Fimages\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry-creative-lever.webp",[12,632,634],{"id":633},"lead-gen-and-ecommerce-are-two-different-worlds","Lead-gen and ecommerce are two different worlds",[17,636,637],{},"One trap inside the benchmark tables: the conversion rates for lead generation and the conversion rates for ecommerce purchases live on completely different scales, and mixing them produces nonsense. The WordStream lead-gen rows run from 3.77% to 18.25%, because a \"conversion\" there is usually a form fill, a quote request, or a claimed offer, all low-friction actions. An ecommerce purchase, where someone pulls out a credit card, carries far more friction and converts far lower.",[17,639,640],{},"Contentsquare's 2026 benchmark, built on 99 billion sessions across more than 6,000 sites, separates the two cleanly for retail. It puts the retail conversion rate at 3.7% on desktop and 2.0% on mobile, a roughly 1.85x device gap, and reports returning visitors converting at 2.9% against new visitors at 1.7%. So a 2.4% purchase rate that would look alarming next to an 18% lead-gen row is, for a store, squarely in the normal band, especially once you account for how much of your traffic is mobile. If you sell physical products, anchor yourself to the retail conversion figures and your own device mix, not the lead-gen rows, and read the ROAS framing above (break-even, not a borrowed multiple) rather than the cost-per-lead column.",[17,642,643],{},"The device split matters more than the headline number. A store that is 80% mobile and judges itself against a desktop benchmark will always look broken; the same store read against the 2.0% mobile line may be perfectly healthy. New-versus-returning matters just as much: a campaign pushing cold prospecting traffic should be measured against the 1.7% new-visitor rate, not the blended figure, because returning buyers convert nearly twice as often and quietly flatter any average. Locate yourself in your own segment, then judge the campaign against your break-even, not the cross-industry average.",[645,646,648],"h3",{"id":647},"the-us-ceiling-why-your-own-numbers-may-run-lower","The US ceiling: why your own numbers may run lower",[17,650,651],{},"Every figure in the WordStream tables comes from US accounts, and the United States is the most expensive Facebook market on earth. Statista's country data has the US posting the highest CPM and the highest CPC of any major market as of early 2025, with emerging markets such as India costing a fraction of that. The practical consequence is simple: the public benchmark tables describe US economics, so an advertiser outside the US, across much of Asia, Latin America, the Middle East and beyond, typically sees lower numbers across the board.",[17,653,654],{},"Read the US figure as a ceiling, not a floor. If your cost per lead in a lower-cost market comes in well under the WordStream row, that is the market, not a miracle, and you should not pat yourself on the back for beating a benchmark built on the world's priciest auction. The reverse is the real warning sign: if you are running outside the US and your costs match or exceed the US table, something in the account (the offer, the creative, the audience) is working against you. Calibrate to your own market's reality, using the US table as the high-water mark it actually is.",[17,656,657],{},"Real ad examples show how varied the field is once you look across verticals rather than at one category. A beauty brand runs a before-and-after angle on skin that cleared up over a few weeks. A clinic leans on a limited consultation slot to drive lead-form sign-ups. A fitness studio runs member testimonials. A jewellery label showcases a piece in lifestyle context. Each sits in a different row of the table, with a different cost and a different conversion bar, which is exactly why a single \"good\" benchmark was never going to fit all of them.",[12,659,661],{"id":660},"why-benchmarks-are-a-compass-not-a-target","Why benchmarks are a compass, not a target",[17,663,664],{},"A benchmark is a single provider's sample, and you should weight it accordingly. WordStream and LocaliQ publish the same dataset; Gupta is one tracker; Contentsquare is one panel. None of them is the market. The year-over-year swings make the point: when a category's cost per lead halves or doubles between annual reports, that usually reflects a changed advertiser sample in the dataset, not a law of the auction that your account must obey. Restaurants and dental can lurch wildly from one edition to the next for exactly this reason. Weight the multi-year direction of a number over any single cell, and verify the attribution window behind any table you find before you treat it as your target.",[17,666,667],{},"Two 2026-specific shifts also date older benchmarks, and explain why a table you find elsewhere may not match your account. First, on January 12, 2026, Meta removed the 7-day-view and 28-day-view attribution windows from the Ads Insights API, so benchmarks built on those longer windows are no longer directly comparable to numbers your account reports today. Second, the conversion signal itself has been structurally thinner since Apple's App Tracking Transparency: a University of Maryland study estimated ATT cut ad click-throughs by about 37%, which raised the effective cost floor and is part of why creative variety now does some of the work that precise tracking used to. On top of both, Meta reported the average price per ad rose about 9% across full-year 2025, so the baseline drifts upward every year regardless of anything you do. A benchmark from two years ago is a different currency.",[17,669,670],{},"So treat the master table above as a compass that tells you roughly where north is, then navigate by your own instruments. Match the objective to the right table, find your vertical row, read cost next to quality in the same line, calibrate for your market against the US ceiling, and judge the trend over weeks. The cleanest way to actually move a number you do not like is the same loop in every category: research the angles already winning in your vertical, generate the next on-brand variation, launch it to Meta, then read the result and feed it into the next round. A platform like AdPlay.ai keeps that loop in one place, but the discipline holds with any workflow. Benchmarks tell you where you stand; the next test is what changes it.",{"title":672,"searchDepth":673,"depth":673,"links":674},"",2,[675,676,677,678,679,683],{"id":14,"depth":673,"text":15},{"id":47,"depth":673,"text":48},{"id":497,"depth":673,"text":498},{"id":573,"depth":673,"text":574},{"id":633,"depth":673,"text":634,"children":680},[681],{"id":647,"depth":682,"text":648},3,{"id":660,"depth":673,"text":661},null,"neutral","CPC, CPM, CTR, conversion rate, CPL and ROAS Facebook ad benchmarks by industry for 2026, with neutral data and a method for reading your own numbers.",[],"md",[690,693,696,699,702,705,708,711],{"question":691,"answer":692},"What is a good benchmark for Facebook ads in 2026?","There is no single good number, because it depends on your campaign objective and industry. For Leads campaigns, WordStream's 2025 data puts the all-industry average at a 2.59% CTR, a $1.92 CPC, a 7.72% conversion rate and a $27.66 cost per lead, with per-industry costs ranging from $3.16 for restaurants to $76.71 for dental. For Traffic campaigns the average CPC is lower at $0.70. Blended Meta CPM sat near $8.19 in 2025 per Gupta Media. Find your vertical row rather than judging against the blended average.",{"question":694,"answer":695},"What is the average CPC, CPM, CTR, and conversion rate on Facebook ads by industry?","WordStream's 2025 study reports these for two separate objectives. For Leads, the all-industry averages are a 2.59% CTR, a $1.92 CPC and a 7.72% conversion rate; for Traffic they are a 1.71% CTR and a $0.70 CPC. By industry the spread is wide, for example a Leads CTR of 3.92% for arts and entertainment versus 1.05% for dental. CPM is not in those tables; Gupta Media's tracker put the blended Meta CPM near $8.19 in 2025. Use the industry table on this page to find your exact row.",{"question":697,"answer":698},"Which industry has the cheapest Facebook ads and which has the most expensive?","On WordStream's 2025 Leads data, restaurants and food had the cheapest cost per lead at $3.16, helped by cheap clicks and an 18.25% conversion rate. Dental practices had the most expensive at $76.71, driven by a $9.78 cost per click. On the Traffic objective, shopping, collectibles and gifts had the cheapest clicks at $0.34, while finance and insurance had the priciest at $1.22. These reflect US accounts, so your market may run lower.",{"question":700,"answer":701},"Why are my Facebook ad costs higher than the industry benchmark?","The usual reasons are a mismatched comparison or weaker creative. First, check you are reading the right table: a Leads campaign benchmarked against Traffic numbers will always look expensive. Second, public benchmarks are US-based, so if you advertise in a lower-cost market and still pay US-level costs, the offer, audience or creative is working against you. Beyond that, a weak hook (low CTR) or a busy auction (high CPM) both push CPC up, since cost per click is roughly CPM divided by CTR. Seasonal peaks like Black Friday also roughly double CPM.",{"question":703,"answer":704},"Are Facebook ad benchmarks the same for Traffic and Leads campaigns?","No, and treating them as interchangeable is the most common benchmarking mistake. WordStream publishes Traffic and Leads as separate objectives with different numbers: the all-industry Traffic CTR is 1.71% with a $0.70 CPC, while the all-industry Leads CTR is 2.59% with a $1.92 CPC. A Traffic campaign buys cheap clicks; a Leads campaign optimises for higher-intent form fills and costs more per click. Always compare your campaign to the table that matches its objective.",{"question":706,"answer":707},"Do these US benchmarks apply outside the United States?","Only as a ceiling. The WordStream figures come from US accounts, and Statista's country data shows the US is the most expensive Facebook market, with the highest CPM and CPC of any major market, while emerging markets like India cost a fraction. So advertisers outside the US, including across much of Asia, typically see lower numbers and should read the US table as a high-water mark, not a target. If you run outside the US and still match US costs, something in the account needs attention.",{"question":709,"answer":710},"How do I compare my Facebook ad metrics to my industry the right way?","Use five steps. Match your campaign objective to the right table (Traffic or Leads). Find your exact vertical row instead of the blended average. Note the attribution window, since a shorter window reports fewer conversions and a higher cost per conversion. Read the cost metric next to the quality metric in the same row, because a cheap lead that never closes is not actually cheap. And judge on a multi-week trend rather than a single day, because daily figures are noise while the auction reprices constantly.",{"question":712,"answer":713},"How often do Facebook ad benchmarks change, and can I trust a single year's data?","Treat any single year as a compass, not a law. Each public benchmark is one provider's sample, so big year-over-year swings in a category usually reflect a changed advertiser sample rather than a market law your account must follow. Costs also drift upward structurally: Meta reported the average price per ad rose about 9% across full-year 2025. Weight the multi-year direction of a number over any single cell, and always verify the attribution window behind a table before you treat it as your target.","\u002Fimages\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry-hero.webp","You pulled your Facebook numbers and now you are staring at a cost per lead with no idea whether it is healthy or quietly bleeding budget. The honest answer is that there is no universal good number: a 5% conversion rate is excellent in one industry and poor in another, and a Traffic click and a Leads click are not the same animal. This hub puts CPC, CPM, CTR, conversion rate, cost per lead and ROAS in one industry table, then shows you how to read your own account against it.",{},true,"\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry","2027-01-01",{"title":5,"description":686},[722,726,729,732,736,739,742,745,748,752],{"label":723,"url":724,"year":725},"WordStream \u002F LocaliQ, Facebook Ads Benchmarks 2025","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.wordstream.com\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-2025","2025",{"label":727,"url":728,"year":725},"LocaliQ, Facebook Advertising Benchmarks 2025","https:\u002F\u002Flocaliq.com\u002Fblog\u002Ffacebook-advertising-benchmarks\u002F",{"label":730,"url":731,"year":725},"Gupta Media, The True Cost of Social Media Ads (CPM Tracker)","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.guptamedia.com\u002Fsocial-media-ads-cost",{"label":733,"url":734,"year":735},"Contentsquare, 2026 Digital Experience Benchmark (conversion rates)","https:\u002F\u002Fcontentsquare.com\u002Fguides\u002Fdigital-experience-benchmark\u002Fconversions\u002F","2026",{"label":737,"url":738,"year":725},"Statista, Facebook average CPM by country 2025","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.statista.com\u002Fstatistics\u002F829495\u002Fcpm-facebook-countries\u002F",{"label":740,"url":741,"year":725},"Statista, Facebook average CPC by country 2025","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.statista.com\u002Fstatistics\u002F279946\u002Fcost-per-click-on-facebook-in-selected-countries\u002F",{"label":743,"url":744,"year":725},"Meta, Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Results","https:\u002F\u002Finvestor.atmeta.com\u002Finvestor-news\u002Fpress-release-details\u002F2026\u002FMeta-Reports-Fourth-Quarter-and-Full-Year-2025-Results\u002Fdefault.aspx",{"label":746,"url":747,"year":735},"Supermetrics, Facebook Ads Attribution Window and Metric Removals (Jan 12, 2026)","https:\u002F\u002Fdocs.supermetrics.com\u002Fdocs\u002Ffacebook-ads-new-historical-limitations-attribution-window-and-metric-removals-january-12-2026",{"label":749,"url":750,"year":751},"University of Maryland Smith School, Small Businesses Take Big Hit from Apple's Privacy Regulation","https:\u002F\u002Fwww.rhsmith.umd.edu\u002Fresearch\u002Fsmall-businesses-take-big-hit-apples-privacy-regulation","2024",{"label":753,"url":754,"year":725},"Search Engine Land, Facebook ad costs jump, beating Google's rise","https:\u002F\u002Fsearchengineland.com\u002Ffacebook-ad-costs-jump-beat-google-461690",[756,759,762,764,766,769,772,776,780],{"label":757,"value":352,"source":758},"All-industry Facebook cost per lead (Leads objective)","WordStream, 2025",{"label":760,"value":761,"source":758},"Cost per lead spread, restaurants to dental","$3.16-$76.71",{"label":763,"value":489,"source":758},"All-industry CPC, Traffic objective",{"label":765,"value":346,"source":758},"All-industry CPC, Leads objective",{"label":767,"value":535,"source":768},"Blended Meta (Facebook and Instagram) CPM, full year","Gupta Media, 2025",{"label":770,"value":546,"source":771},"Black Friday 2024 Meta CPM (roughly double the year average)","Gupta Media, 2024",{"label":773,"value":774,"source":775},"Retail ecommerce conversion rate, desktop vs mobile","3.7% \u002F 2.0%","Contentsquare, 2026",{"label":777,"value":778,"source":779},"Facebook average price per ad change, full-year 2025","+9%","Meta, 2025",{"label":781,"value":782,"source":783},"Estimated drop in ad click-throughs from Apple ATT","~37%","University of Maryland, 2024","blog\u002Ffacebook-ads-benchmarks-by-industry","Glbs9ouIRMBiIirHO5EsOJOLQe9rx9MLpcFXaDWOazo",1786093699021]