The Challenge
High-ticket appliances convert slowly. Shoppers research for days, compare specifications, read reviews and leave repeatedly before buying. Judged on conversion rate, the account looks broken; judged on return, it is the strongest in our book. The task was to keep spend disciplined through a long consideration cycle without cutting the campaigns that were quietly working.
Quick answer
A kitchen and home appliances brand on Amazon India returned 11.14× ROAS at 8.98% ACoS across 90 days — ₹60.67 L of ad sales from ₹5.45 L of spend, against ₹1.26 Cr of total revenue and a 4.31% TACoS.
Its conversion rate was 1.71%. Both facts are true at once, and understanding why is the entire lesson.
The numbers
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Total Amazon revenue | ₹1.26 Cr |
| Ad-attributed sales | ₹60.67 L |
| Ad spend | ₹5.45 L |
| ROAS | 11.14× |
| ACoS | 8.98% |
| TACoS | 4.31% |
| Organic share | 52.0% |
| Conversion rate | 1.71% |
| Average order value (ad orders) | ≈ ₹4,007 |
| Sponsored Display ROAS | 19.77× |
Period: 4 June – 1 September 2026, settled through 31 August. Live account figures.
Why the name is withheld
Client name protected under NDA. All metrics from the live account.
Why a 1.71% conversion rate is fine here
Conversion rate and order value trade against each other. At an average order value near ₹4,000, one conversion in fifty-eight clicks still returns eleven rupees for every rupee spent. In a ₹300 accessory category the same conversion rate would be a disaster.
A conversion-rate benchmark quoted without an order value is meaningless. This is the single most common way appliance and furniture accounts get mismanaged: someone applies an FMCG-shaped rule, concludes the campaigns are failing, and cuts the bids that were producing the return.
What we did
1. Judged campaigns on return, not on conversion rate
Every campaign was assessed on ROAS against its own order value. Nothing was paused for a low conversion rate alone.
2. Used Sponsored Display for the long consideration window
Sponsored Display returned 19.77× — the highest of any ad type in this account, and nearly double Sponsored Products. Appliance shoppers leave and come back over days; retargeting them is far cheaper than winning the first click again. This is where high-ticket categories are consistently under-invested.
3. Kept Sponsored Brands small when it did not work
SB returned 1.96× here against SP’s 10.85×, so it stayed at under ₹2,000 of spend. We report it rather than hide it — not every ad type earns its place in every account, and a proposal that claims all three always work is selling a template.
4. Archived aggressively
300 campaigns archived against 72 active. Long consideration cycles generate a lot of tests; keeping the failures visible in the account makes the working structure impossible to see.
Is 11× ROAS repeatable?
At this order value and this spend level, it is sustainable — but it is a function of high AOV, not of unusual skill. The same discipline applied to a ₹400 product would produce a fraction of the number. Compare ROAS only against accounts in your own price band.
Free Amazon audit — we will run the same diagnostic on your account.
Result
11.14× ROAS at 8.98% ACoS on ₹5.45 L of spend, producing ₹60.67 L in ad sales and ₹1.26 Cr total revenue — at a conversion rate of just 1.71%.
11.14×
Blended ROAS
8.98%
ACoS
4.31%
TACoS
₹1.26 Cr
Total Amazon Revenue
1.71%
Conversion Rate
19.77×
Sponsored Display ROAS
90 days, Jun–Aug 2026
Period
Under NDA
Client Name