Static-image benchmark pages are useful for paid social, display, and retargeting programs where quick comprehension and offer clarity matter more than narrative depth. CTR, thumb-stop rate, CPM efficiency, and click-to-conversion quality.
Use these labeled KPIs together instead of judging static image performance from one headline number. Conversion-sensitive metrics update when you change the conversion type above.
| Metric | Median | Top Quartile | What It Tells You |
|---|---|---|---|
| CTR | 2.4% | 4.1% | Creative and message-to-audience fit |
| CPC | $2.80 | $1.65 | Click acquisition efficiency |
| CVR | 3.4% | 6.2% | Landing-page and offer effectiveness |
| CPA | $82 | $45 | Cost to generate the selected conversion |
| CPM | $12.40 | $7.80 | Auction pressure and reach efficiency |
| ROAS | 3.1x | 5.2x | Revenue efficiency where purchase value is tracked |
CTR, thumb-stop rate, CPM efficiency, and click-to-conversion quality. Benchmarks should be interpreted with contextual commentary, not as standalone averages.
| Asset | Average | Median | Top Quartile | Bottom Quartile |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Static Image | 1.7% | 1.3% | 2.8% | 0.6% |
These are the main drivers that typically explain why the same headline metric changes across channels, industries, and conversion contexts.
| Factor | Why It Matters |
|---|---|
| Visual clarity and contrast | Changes how ctr, thumb-stop rate, cpm efficiency, and click-to-conversion quality. |
| Offer comprehension speed | Changes how ctr, thumb-stop rate, cpm efficiency, and click-to-conversion quality. |
| Placement fit and creative fatigue | Changes how ctr, thumb-stop rate, cpm efficiency, and click-to-conversion quality. |
Static-image benchmark pages are useful for paid social, display, and retargeting programs where quick comprehension and offer clarity matter more than narrative depth.
Static-image benchmarks should be compared against objective and audience context because simplicity can outperform heavier formats in some response-driven environments.
Static-image benchmarks should be compared against objective and audience context because simplicity can outperform heavier formats in some response-driven environments.
Static-image benchmarks should be compared against objective and audience context because simplicity can outperform heavier formats in some response-driven environments.
The Benchmarketing 4-Band Method. The Benchmarketing 4-Band Method reads every marketing metric against four percentile bands — P25 (bottom quartile), median, P75 (top quartile), and elite (top ~10%) — for a specific industry and channel, instead of a single cross-industry average. Averages blend brand and non-brand campaigns, $500/month and $500,000/month accounts, and unrelated industries into a number almost nobody actually has.
Where the numbers come from. The figures on this page come from the Benchmarketing benchmark dataset — thousands of curated benchmark observations across channels, industries, and US metro areas. Every statistic traces to a named source: WordStream Google Ads Benchmarks (2024), Meta Business Insights (2024), HubSpot Email Marketing Report (2024), Unbounce Conversion Benchmark Report (2024), Databox Marketing Benchmark Report (2024), Benchmarketing Platform Data (2023–2024). Benchmarketing does not publish anonymous "studies show" figures.
The Benchmarketing position. Beating the cross-industry average is a vanity milestone, not a target. Compare your number to the P25–P75 band for your specific industry and channel; if you are above average but below your industry's P75, you are leaving performance on the table.
They often perform best when the offer is simple, visual, and easy to understand in a very short attention window.
They not be benchmarked directly against video without audience and objective context because the formats serve different jobs in the funnel.