Health & Fitness
Case Study: Runtastic
About Runtastic
Founded in 2009, Runtastic has rapidly grown into an innovative portfolio of apps, products and services that track and manage health and fitness data to motivate individuals to get in shape, stay healthy and improve overall fitness.
With more than 210 million downloads and 110 million registered users, Runtastic’s family of apps consists of a select group of core apps and a larger group of satellite apps, which, together, serve to provide comprehensive tracking, organizational and educational services to users across a broad range of health, nutrition and fitness interests. Whether you are a novice or an athlete, Runtastic makes exercise easy and fun!
Challenge 1
Converting specialized app users into Runtastic Results App users
Main campaign KPIs:
- CPI – COST PER INSTALL: Will Runtastic acquire users cheaper through this audience targeting?
- CPP – COST PER PURCHASE: Will Runtastic acquire subscribers cheaper through this audience targeting?
- RTP – REGISTRATION TO PURCHASE: Will Runtastic be able to push users down the conversion funnel to become subscribers?
- ROAS – RETURN ON AD SPEND: Will Runtastic generate money (positive ROI) after 30 days?
Solution 1 to Challenge 1
Efficiently targeting the right users to the right campaign
Runtastic wants to target users that have been active in its portfolio but did not download Runtastic Results yet. Install and other events are pulled from the Adjust dashboard directly to its Facebook Ads account. In this campaign, Runtastic targeted users that have installed the Sixpack App within the last 180 days with a video ad on Facebook.
Results to Campaign 1
Increasing campaign ROAS by 74.31%
- Male cross-promo campaigns performed better than female
- RTP is more or less the same as in other audience targeting campaigns.
| Female | Male | |
|---|---|---|
| CTR | 0.78% | 2.02% |
| CVR | 34% | 46% |
| RR | 25% | 31% |
| RTP | 3% | 3% |
Overall campaign ROAS (30 days) 74.31%
Solution 2 to Challenge 1
Using Audience Builder to segment their users
Runtastic used Audience Builder to segment its users further before plugging the audience into Facebook Custom Audiences. Using this new feature, Runtastic can target active users in its community on a more granular level (see targeting specifics on the right). Would Audience Builder drive even better results than they saw on their benchmark campaign?
Results to Campaign 2
Increasing campaign ROAS by 179%
With the extra segmentation achieved through Audience Builder, Runtastic was able to target higher value users much more effectively as seen with the drastic improvement of RTP when compared to Campaign A. Additionally, they saw positive ROAS after just seven days, compared to the benchmark campaign where it took a longer period of time.
-
Male cross-promo campaigns still outperforming female
-
RTP for male audience is almost 9X better
-
RTP for female audience is almost 6X better
-
Decrease in CPP for male
-
Decrease in CPP for female
-
Overall ROAS of the campaign improved
| Female | Male | |
|---|---|---|
| CTR | 0.75% | 1.77% |
| CVR | 40% | 43.75% |
| RR | 14.29% | 17.30% |
| RTP | 16.67% | 26.09% |
Overall campaign ROAS (30 days) 179.1%
Challenge 2
Speeding up operation time & launching campaigns faster
Runtastic was eager to test out Facebook’s new value-based lookalikes feature. Unfortunately, it required the work of different internal stakeholders to create an audience with user level LTV. With Audience Builder, Runtastic was able to easily pull the complex user data needed, without having to request information from other teams.
Runtastic tracks all of its subscription revenue events with Adjust so it was able to segment the users based on the purchase type.
The LAL-LTV (lookalikes of lifetime value users / value-based targeting) segment is in theory and by logic highly similar to the Runtastic LAL-PREM segment, which are lookalike of all users who are active or who have a Premium Membership (with or without a renewal). Due to similarity of these segments, the LAL-PREM segment was taken as a benchmark to compare against the LAL-LTV targeting.
So, before launching the LAL-LTV segment, the overlap between the segments were checked through Facebook, to avoid competing segments.
Since there was no significant overlap found, the test proceeded as planned.
The Result
CPP decreased by -61.63%
Campaign Results
The campaigns are still live; the data below is pulled from 18.05-18.06.2017
| CVR | ITR | RTP | ROAS | CPI | CPR | CPP | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LALPREM Benchmark | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
| LALLTV Audience Builder | +4.94% | +10.40% | -11.43% | -2.64% | -3.18% | -12.25% | -0.78% |
| All other segments (average) | -6.07% | +17.06% | -72.96% | -65.64% | -18.18% | -30.20% | +158.58% |
When Runtastic evaluated the CPP of the LAL-LTV campaign against the average of all other target segments that ran during the same period, it saw that the CPP was a whopping — 61.63% cheaper!
Working with Audience Builder in conjunction with Facebook’s new targeting feature has added a lot of value to the Runtastic campaigns — they’ve been able to quickly pull seed lists and upload these seamlessly into Facebook. Because of this, they’ve been able to acquire more subscribers, which are more important for them in the long-term than simple users (installers) and registrants.
Overall, the LAL-LTV performance is more or less the same as the LAL-PREM performance (based on the mentioned main KPIs). This means this campaign is on par with the best performing targeted campaigns that Runtastic has launched so far.
Runtastic is happy with the performance of this new segment targeting, especially finding that there are no overlaps with any of the current segments they target. They will continue to use the LAL-LTV target segment and expand this across other key geos and platforms.
