Where they started
A low cost per lead built on content downloads that never reached a sales conversation.
NewRead our latest case study, published by Google Read it here
B2B SaaS Case Study
A paid search transformation from cheap content-download conversions to sales-rated, pipeline-generating leads, with high-intent lead share more than tripled.
DataHub
Metadata platform for data and AI
Where they started
A low cost per lead built on content downloads that never reached a sales conversation.
What we changed
Display and Demand Gen retired, broad match removed, campaigns split by product theme and region.
Where they are now
High-intent leads 1.6% โ 5.3%, cost per quality lead halved, and 79% more deals.
DataHub is a metadata platform that helps data teams discover, govern, trace and monitor their data. Its paid search program has to reach technical and data buyers across several product themes and regions, and turn them into sales-rated pipeline.
| Category | Metadata platform / data catalog (B2B SaaS) |
|---|---|
| Product themes advertised | Data governance, data lineage, data observability, metadata and AI, plus brand, competitor and financial services campaigns |
| Markets | United States, European Union and global |
| Channels | Google Search and Performance Max (after the rebuild) |
| Definition of success | Leads rated High by sales, attributed deals and pipeline value in the CRM |
DataHub's account looked efficient because its cost per lead was low. But most of those leads were gated content downloads from Display and Demand Gen that entered the CRM and stopped there. None were rated High by sales.
The old metric
Cheap, and inflated by content downloads. It counted form fills, and few of those were buyers. Reported CPL was low because the account was paying for the wrong thing.
The real metric
Higher on paper, but every lead behind it is a sales-rated, pipeline-generating conversation. The value of each lead rose with it.
21 live campaigns across six channel types, structurally unable to show which spend produced revenue.
Retire the waste, impose discipline and structure, fix where clicks land, then let Performance Max and Search each do their own job.
On platform metrics, Demand Gen looked like a top performer. The CRM said otherwise: of the leads sales scored, about 72% were rated Low, the rest Medium, and none High. It never appeared against a closed deal, so it was wound down in stages and fully retired.
Display's "conversions" were gated content downloads that entered the CRM and stopped. The deals it was credited with carried no pipeline value. It was switched off with the rest of the legacy build.
Broad match was removed. Search ran on phrase and exact only, split by intent, with brand isolated on exact match. One broad keyword alone had been taking a third of Search budget.
Blended campaigns were split so each product theme (data governance, data lineage, data observability, metadata and AI, competitor, financial services, brand) in each region (US, EU, global) got its own budget, keywords and landing page. Performance became measurable, and one theme could be funded or cut without touching the rest.
Paid clicks moved off developer documentation, expired webinars and blog posts onto product pages matched to each campaign theme. Pages were consolidated onto ones the team controls and tests.
Performance Max campaigns were scaled, including an EU product campaign, and tuned to fill the funnel efficiently while themed Search supplied the qualified conversations.
| Stage | What happened |
|---|---|
| 1. Baseline | 21 campaigns; 42% of spend in Display and Demand Gen; broad match unmanaged |
| 2. Rebuild begins | 11 restructured Search campaigns launched; legacy campaigns wound down; PMax conversions scaled |
| 3. Legacy off | All legacy Search and Display switched off; PMax reaches 58% of conversions |
| 4. Scale and test | EU product PMax launched; bid experiments opened; Demand Gen enters its final stage |
| 5. Consolidation | Demand Gen fully retired; global financial services campaign added; bid tests judged and cut |
| 6. Steady state | 16 campaigns (12 Search + 4 PMax), zero broad match serving |
Performance Max buys conversion volume cheaply but broadly: 2.5โ3.5% of its leads were rated High, versus 13โ25% from themed Search. PMax fills the funnel; Search supplies the qualified conversations. The budget split between them is set deliberately and reviewed.
Share of Leads Rated High by Sales, by Campaign Type
Bars run to the top of each reported range.
| Campaign type | Role | High-rated lead share |
|---|---|---|
| Performance Max | Fill the funnel; 70% of conversions on 22% of spend | 2.5โ3.5% |
| Themed Search | Supply qualified, sales-ready conversations | 13โ25% |
The scale challenge As PMax scaled, low-quality leads from universities and NGOs began flooding the CRM.
The fix PMax was set to optimise only to medium- and high-threshold leads, containing the junk without losing volume.
The account moved from 21 blended campaigns across six channel types to 16 campaigns across two, where every live campaign maps to one product theme in one region.
| Area | Before | After GrowthSpree |
|---|---|---|
| Success metric | Platform cost per lead | Sales-rated lead quality and attributed deals |
| Channel mix | 6 channel types; 42% of spend on Display + Demand Gen | Search + Performance Max only |
| Match types | 71 broad keywords, 31% of Search spend | Phrase and exact only; brand isolated on exact |
| Campaign structure | 21 campaigns blending geo, theme and funnel | 16 campaigns, one theme per region each |
| Landing pages | 26 pages incl. docs and expired webinars; 36% of spend on product pages | 16 pages; 79% of spend on theme-matched product pages |
| Performance Max | 5% of conversions | 70% of conversions on 22% of spend, quality-thresholded |
| Documentation pages taking clicks | 7 | 1 |
Overall cost per lead stayed roughly the same, but the leads were materially better: high-intent share rose from 1.6% to 5.3%, low-quality share fell from 82% to 69%, and deals followed the restructured build.
Before vs After: Seven Numbers That Moved
| Metric | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| High-intent (High-rated) share of paid leads | 1.6% | 5.3% |
| Low-quality share of paid leads | 82% | 69% |
| Restructured campaigns' share of attributed deals | 26% | 61% |
| Restructured campaigns' share of attributed pipeline value | 42% | 67% |
| Spend on product landing pages | 36% | 79% |
| Display + Demand Gen share of spend | 42% | 0% |
| Broad-match share of Search spend | 31% | 0% |
The results
Not everything worked first time. These are the calls that shaped the result.
Reported cost per lead went up. Once cheap content downloads stopped counting, platform dashboards looked worse for a while even as lead quality climbed. We reported on sales-rated leads so the change wasn't misread.
Scaling Performance Max brought in junk. Low-quality leads from universities and NGOs started flooding the CRM. We fixed it by optimising PMax only to leads that met medium- and high-quality thresholds.
Several bid experiments didn't beat the control. They were judged and cut rather than left running.
Demand Gen couldn't be switched off overnight. It was wound down in stages so the account didn't lose volume while restructured campaigns ramped up.
Get a free audit of what your paid program is really optimising for.
A cheap conversion that never becomes a conversation is not a win. Every channel is measured on sales-rated leads first.
Nothing was diagnosable in the blended account. Bifurcation is why any single theme can now be funded or cut on its own.
PMax buys volume efficiently; themed Search supplies the qualified leads. The split is set deliberately, and reviewed.
Reported CPL is an input. Sales-rated quality and deals are the outcome, and that is what we manage to.
If your Google Ads account reports a healthy cost per lead but sales says the leads are weak, this is the sequence we used for DataHub.
Pull sales lead ratings and deal attribution for each campaign type before trusting platform cost per lead.
Wind down Display and Demand Gen in stages when their conversions are content downloads that never become sales conversations.
Remove broad match, run phrase and exact split by intent, and isolate brand on exact match.
Give each product theme in each region its own campaign, budget, keywords and landing page so it can be measured and funded independently.
Move traffic off documentation, blogs and expired webinars onto theme-matched product pages you control and test.
Let PMax fill the funnel, optimise it only to medium- and high-quality leads, and keep themed Search for qualified conversations.
Treat cost per lead as an input and review budget splits against sales-rated lead share and attributed pipeline.
Services behind this result
FAQ
GrowthSpree rebuilt DataHub's Google Ads account around qualified pipeline. The share of paid-search leads rated High by sales rose from 1.6% to 5.3%, cost per high-quality lead fell 50%, deals from the restructured campaigns grew about 79%, and restructured campaigns rose from 26% to 61% of attributed deals and from 42% to 67% of attributed pipeline value.
Judge every campaign on sales-rated lead quality in the CRM rather than platform cost per lead, retire channels that only produce content downloads, remove broad match, split campaigns by product theme and region, and send clicks to product pages. For DataHub, a B2B data and AI SaaS, this lifted high-intent lead share from 1.6% to 5.3% and grew deals from the rebuilt campaigns by 79%.
GrowthSpree, a B2B SaaS and B2B tech paid acquisition agency specialising in Google Ads, LinkedIn Ads and Meta Ads, rebuilt DataHub's Google Ads program. GrowthSpree optimises toward CRM-rated lead quality and pipeline rather than platform cost per lead.
DataHub is a metadata platform for data discovery, data governance, data lineage and data observability, used by data teams to understand and manage their data assets. Its Google Ads program targets buyers across the US, EU and global markets.
Most of the cheap leads were gated content downloads from Google Display and Demand Gen campaigns. They entered the CRM and stopped there. Demand Gen produced zero leads rated High by sales, and Display was credited with deals that carried no pipeline value, so a low cost per lead was measuring form fills, not buyers.
Only if they are judged on CRM lead quality rather than platform conversions. For DataHub, Display and Demand Gen took 42% of spend and looked like top performers on platform metrics, but produced no High-rated leads or pipeline, so GrowthSpree retired both in stages.
71 broad match keywords consumed 31% of Search spend at more than double the account's cost per lead, with no intent control. One broad keyword alone took a third of Search budget. Moving to phrase and exact match only, split by intent with brand isolated on exact, took broad-match spend to zero.
Campaign bifurcation means splitting blended campaigns so each one covers a single product theme in a single region, with its own budget, keywords and landing page. For DataHub, themes such as data governance, data lineage, data observability, metadata and AI, competitor and financial services were split across US, EU and global campaigns, so any theme could be measured, funded or cut on its own.
Performance Max is good at buying conversion volume cheaply but it is broad. For DataHub, PMax grew from 5% to 70% of conversions on 22% of spend and cut its cost per conversion by 61%, but only 2.5 to 3.5% of its leads were rated High, versus 13 to 25% from themed Search campaigns. GrowthSpree uses PMax to fill the funnel and Search to supply qualified conversations, and optimises PMax only to medium- and high-threshold leads.
When scaling PMax for DataHub started bringing in low-quality leads from universities and NGOs, GrowthSpree contained it by optimising PMax only toward leads that met medium- and high-quality thresholds, instead of every form fill.
Paid clicks moved off developer documentation, expired webinars and blog posts onto product pages matched to each campaign theme. Spend on product pages rose from 36% to 79%, distinct paid landing pages fell from 26 to 16, zero-conversion pages fell from 12 to 5, and wasted landing-page spend dropped from 4.8% to 1.2%.
Reviewed by Ishan Manchanda, Co-Founder, GrowthSpree
Last reviewed September 2026
GrowthSpree is a revenue-focused paid acquisition agency for B2B SaaS and B2B tech, running Google Ads, LinkedIn Ads and Meta Ads toward CRM-tracked qualified pipeline. It has managed $60M+ in ad spend across 300+ B2B SaaS and tech companies.
Same operating model, different markets and channels.
PriceLabs 3.6x Google Ads ROAS
0.7 โ 2.5 ROAS (3.6x) on Google Ads in 9 months, budget scaled $90K โ $180K/mo
Read case study
Trackxi 4ร trial starts
4ร trial starts and 51% lower cost per trial on a flat $5K/mo budget, in 6 months
Read case study84% lower cost per SQL
84% lower cost per SQL and 460% more qualified leads on lower spend, plus 4 enterprise SQLs within days of a new European launch
Read case study