When better ROAS does not mean a better business.

If a platform reports higher ROAS, I want to understand why. Did customer demand improve? Did the mix shift toward existing customers? Did we reduce prospecting? Did the attribution window change? Each explanation leads to a different decision.

Check that the comparison means what it appears to mean.

I start with consistent definitions and comparable periods. Then I look for changes in spend, promotions, product mix, and the split between new and returning customers. A better average can conceal a smaller business or a different set of customers.

Follow the money beyond the platform.

Attributed revenue is one view of performance. Revenue after returns, discounts, product costs, and fulfillment answers a different question. A campaign can sell more of a lower-margin product and look stronger in the ad account while contributing less to the business.

In B2B, I also want the connection to qualified pipeline and eventual revenue. Lower lead costs do not tell me much if the leads are less likely to become customers.

Use the discrepancy to ask a better question.

When platform reporting and business results disagree, I do not immediately dismiss either one. I check what each is measuring, what it leaves out, and whether other channels are claiming credit for the same activity.

That may lead to an attribution review, a closer look at customer cohorts, or a controlled test. The point is to narrow the uncertainty enough to make a useful investment decision.

ROAS belongs in the conversation. Revenue quality, margin, and evidence of incremental contribution belong there too.