Autos Vega Ford · Meta Lead Generation

True Cost Per Lead — June 2026

Reconciling four different lead counts against one spend figure. Meta / Facebook, Ford rooftop, full month.
Meta spend (June)
$13,190
Graph API, Ford ad account
True cost / lead
$22.51
586 unique form leads
Leads captured
605
586 unique · 19 duplicates
What Ads Manager shows
$36.04
under-counts by 39%

The headline

Your real cost per lead is ~$22–26, not the $36 Meta's Ads Manager reports. Meta only attributes 366 of June's Ford leads to its own campaigns, but the LeadGoGo inbox actually captured 605 (586 unique people). Judging performance off Ads Manager alone makes the campaigns look ~60% more expensive per lead than they really are.

Cost per lead by measurement source

Same $13,190 spend ÷ five different lead counts. Each system counts something slightly different — lower isn't automatically "better," it's about what's being measured.

The lead funnel — capture → CRM → sales

Where the 605 form submissions go. Two leaks worth fixing: duplicates, and leads that never reach the dealer CRM.
Two fixable leaks: ~19 duplicate submissions (3%), and ~70 leads (12%) captured by LeadGoGo never made it into the dealer CRM — that's sellable, already-paid-for pipeline lost to a sync gap, at $0 extra ad cost. And in this raw feed, 100% of leads sit "Unassigned / Intake" — confirm they're being routed to salespeople promptly.

Daily lead volume — the spend ramp worked

Leads per day. The mid-June budget scale-up (June is the year's peak at $13.2K) drove a step-change in volume.
~15× lift. June 1–15 averaged ~3 leads/day (38 total). From June 16 on — when spend scaled — it jumped to ~38/day (567 total). The paid-social ramp is directly responsible for the June lead surge.

Which forms produced the leads

Lead formLeadsShare
"Autos Vega Ford 2026" and its Privacy-Policy variant account for 539 of 605 leads (89%). Consolidating the older duplicate forms would clean up reporting.

Insights & recommendations