Don't split test the first page
Facebook penalizes split testing on landing pages after ad approval because it views post-approval changes as potential cloaking or non-compliance. The speaker demonstrates this through a failed listicle test that only succeeded when retested using new post IDs instead of modifying the original approved landing page.
Summary
The speaker explains why split testing should not be conducted on the first landing page after Facebook ad approval. Facebook continuously scans landing pages, and the platform has strong negative reactions to changes made after an ad has been approved. Facebook interprets post-approval changes in two problematic ways: either as cloaking attempts (trying to circumvent policies by getting approval then changing to non-compliant content), or as a softer rejection of the modified content. The speaker illustrates this with a personal case study involving a listicle that underwent a 50/50 split test with copy changes (different headline, sub-headline, and lead). The control variant declined in performance while the variation performed even worse, dropping by approximately 50%. After pausing the poor-performing test, the speaker reconsidered the variation's potential and retested it using the correct methodology: maintaining all the same winning creatives but using new post IDs in either a new ad set, new ads, or entirely new campaign. This approach yielded dramatically different results—the listicle transformed from an unprofitable page to a top performer that not only beat the control but replaced it entirely, accumulating over $400,000 in spend over 60 days and becoming one of the fastest-scaling funnels in the speaker's advertising career.
Key Insights
- Facebook views post-approval landing page changes as either cloaking attempts or soft rejections, which can harm ad performance
- A listicle split test with copy changes resulted in the control declining and the variation performing 50% worse than expected
- The speaker retested the poor-performing variation using new post IDs rather than modifying the original approved page
- Using new post IDs converted the listicle from an unprofitable page to a top-performing variant that accumulated over $400,000 in spend within 60 days
- The correct split testing approach after approval involves creating new post IDs across new ad sets, ads, or campaigns while keeping all other winning elements constant
Topics
Transcript
[0:00] Don't do split testing on the first page. The reason you don't split test on the first page is because Facebook is always scanning your landers. And the number one thing that Facebook hates the most is people changing [ __ ] after it's already been approved. So, your ad has been approved, and then you go change the lander after that. Facebook sometimes can view this in one of two ways. The bad way is they view this as cloaking. They think that you're trying to circumvent their policies by getting an ad approved and then changing it to something non-compliant. The second thing is more of like a soft rejection. The best way that I found this…
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from Mark Builds Brands
Your funnel is a creative multiplier
A funnel acts as a creative multiplier that can dramatically improve the performance of the same creatives. By upgrading your funnel's conversion rate, average order value, or LTV, creatives that previously underperformed can become winners, making it easier to discover high-performing creative without necessarily creating better ads.
Why winnings ads eventually die
Winning ads don't actually die; they hit a profitable spending cap that can be extended through strategic media buying, funnel testing, and improved unit economics. A creative is only truly dead after exhausting all optimization options within these levers.
Comparison is a net negative
The speaker argues that comparison is harmful before achieving initial success, but becomes motivating afterward. Social media distorts reality through lies and exaggeration, making premature self-comparison counterproductive and emotionally damaging.
funnel diversity - creative diversity
The speaker argues that funnel optimization matters more than creative diversity in advertising. A well-optimized funnel (high conversion rate, AOV, EPV) makes all creatives perform better, while a poor funnel makes even great creatives underperform—the metaphor being that the funnel is the ocean and creatives are boats that rise and fall with the sea level.
f*ck it. ZERO to $1k/day in 3 days with ai dropshipping. [full case study]
Mark documents achieving $1,000/day in dropshipping sales within 3 days by emphasizing that winning products are created through marketing rather than found, using AI tools for product research and ad creation, and focusing on creatives and funnels over product selection. He details his product criteria, store setup, ad account structure, and AI-generated creative strategies while acknowledging areas for improvement like conversion rate and AOV.