A Lachi Media Study · 126 Companies · $84M in Ad Spend

Local home services companies are more than four times as likely to lose money on their ads when they track leads and phone calls instead of paid jobs.

We analyzed more than $84 million in ad spend across 126 home services companies. The fix wasn’t budget — the smallest shops that measured advertising by profit earned the same return as a company spending $20 million.

126
companies
$84.1M
ad spend
$410M
revenue analyzed
2 yrs
of closed-job data
01 · The number you watch, and the number you live with

Budgeted against revenue, advertising looks routine. Against profit, it’s most of the money.

Home services companies budget advertising as a share of revenue — and by that measure, the spending in this study looked unremarkable. Measured against gross profit, what’s actually left after paying the technician and buying the parts, the same advertising consumed nearly three times as much. That gap is invisible on a standard ad report, because the report stops at the booked lead and never follows the money to what the job earned.

Share of revenue
21%
The number on the monthly report. It looks like a healthy marketing budget.
Share of gross profit
59%
What the same spend actually consumed, after labor and parts. The number owners never see.
02 · Google buys exactly what you ask for

The closer your goal sits to real money, the more your advertising earns.

Automated bidding optimizes toward whatever an account marks as a conversion. Tell it a phone call is the goal, it buys phone calls. Tell it a completed, profitable job is the goal, it buys those. We sorted all 126 accounts by how close their goal sits to actual profit. Return climbed at every step — gross profit earned per dollar of ad spend.

Leads & calls1.16×
Qualified leads1.27×
Completed jobs1.28×
Jobs at revenue1.69×
Jobs at gross profit1.75×
Bar length = median gross profit earned per $1 of ad spend, from optimizing for leads (top) to optimizing for profit (bottom).
The break is between the lead and the job
Accounts optimizing for leads ran their advertising at a loss 37% of the time. Accounts optimizing for completed jobs, just 8%.
A real relationship, not noise
The link between an account’s goal and its return holds across all 126 companies at high significance (rho 0.32, p<0.001).
Industry reaction

“The ad platforms will optimize toward anything you point them at, which is exactly why pointing them at leads instead of profit gets so expensive. Most advertisers already have the tools to fix this, they just haven’t connected their spend to what a job is really worth. This study puts a hard number on that gap, and it’s bigger than most would guess.”

Laura HeritageVP of Partnerships, ClickTech
03 · The part that isn’t supposed to be possible

A shop spending $50,000 earned the same return as an operator spending $20 million.

The assumption in digital advertising is that scale wins — bigger budgets, better data, better results. The study found the opposite where it counts. Among the smallest advertisers, the ones that measured advertising by completed jobs landed in the same profitable range as the largest company in the sample. What separated them from the losers wasn’t budget. It was measurement.

The smallest shops
under $50K / year · optimizing for jobs
1.69×
median return
The $20M operator
$20,000,000 / 2 yrs · multi-market
1.80×
return

Nearly half of the small advertisers beat the $20M operator outright. The technology the big operators have used for years — bidding on what a job is actually worth — now runs on an account managing two trucks.

Lead-optimized accounts lost money more than four times as often as job-optimized ones.
40% → 12%
The same gap held in the 43 accounts Lachi Media observes but does not manage — it’s the measurement, not the manager.
2× / −34%
In Lachi Media’s own case study, one company doubled Google Ads revenue while cutting ad spend by a third.
04 · Why almost nobody has fixed it

If the fix were simply flipping a setting, the losing group would be small. It was the majority.

The platform default

Google and Microsoft optimize toward leads out of the box. Unless you actively change the goal, the system keeps buying calls — most owners don’t know the setting exists.

The integration nobody sets up

Telling the platform what a job is worth means connecting a CRM or field-service system back to the ad account. It’s the step most small shops never take.

Reports built on leads

Agencies build monthly reporting around leads because leads are easy to count. So an entire industry optimizes toward a number with little to do with profit.

The result

Not carelessness — structure. The barriers are real, which is exactly why the companies that cleared them pulled so far ahead of the ones that didn’t.

05 · What a contractor can do about it

You don’t need perfect profit accounting to start. You need to climb one rung.

The single highest-leverage change most contractors can make to their advertising costs nothing in media budget — it’s changing what the account is told to aim for. Most of the gain shows up at the first real step, moving off leads and onto jobs.

  • Send jobs back, not just leads. Feed completed-job outcomes from your CRM to the ad platform, so it learns which clicks become real work.
  • Value the job by revenue. Tell the platform what each job was worth, so it bids toward bigger tickets instead of cheaper calls.
  • Value the job by gross profit. The top of the ladder — bid toward what’s left after labor and parts, and the platform chases the work that actually pays.

If you can report qualified leads today but not job values, that isn’t a reason to wait. It’s the next rung.

06 · Methodology

How the study was run.

Sample
126 US home services companies across service & repair, recurring maintenance, and improvement & construction. 83 managed by Lachi Media, 43 independently observed. Ads ran on Google Ads and, for 36 companies, Microsoft Advertising.
Scale & period
~2 years per account. $84.1M total ad spend — from $43,000 to $20M per company (median $347,500) — and $410M in resulting revenue.
Gross profit
CRM-reported revenue minus technician labor and parts. It does not subtract overhead, vehicles, insurance, or advertising — so true profitability is lower than reported, and the study understates rather than overstates the effect.
Attribution
Revenue matched to advertising through gclid, msclkid, and UTM parameters, matching roughly 90% of ad-sourced jobs. Each account’s goal was classified from its actual conversion configuration.
Statistics
The relationship between goal and return on ad spend is significant across the full sample (Spearman’s rho 0.32, p<0.001) and within the non-managed subset (rho 0.33, p=0.03), and holds within every spend tier.
Limitations
A cross-sectional study of one agency’s client and observed-account base, not a random sample of the industry. Labor is self-reported and calculated differently across W-2 and 1099 companies.

Detailed methodology and aggregate results are available to reporters on request. No individual company is identified, and no client-identifiable data is shared.

Advertising that’s measured by profit, at any size.

Lachi Media builds profit-based advertising for home services companies — the same measurement the biggest operators use, run for small and midsize contractors.

Book a free consultation