Functional Beverage Brand
✓ £570k+ revenue in 6 months
✓ 10.66x ROAS on Hero SKU
✓ 5% TACOS
Overview
A UK-based functional beverage brand with two distinct ranges on Amazon UK: one with established demand in performance nutrition, and another operating in a much tougher, more promotion-heavy wellness category.
We took over the account in Q4 2025.
Six months in, the account has delivered £570k+ in Amazon revenue from c.£29k in ad spend, at a TACOS of 5.0%.
The Problem
The previous setup wasn’t obviously broken.
Campaigns were running. Money was being spent. Reports were being produced.
The issue was deeper than that: the account was being managed as one Amazon account, when in reality there were two very different problems across the brands.
Within the first month, it became clear that each range needed a different approach.
For the performance nutrition range, the main issue wasn’t the campaign structure at all. The bigger problem was that third-party sellers had been holding the Buy Box on the flagship product for much of 2025.
That meant more PPC wasn’t the answer yet. If the brand wasn’t consistently winning its own clicks, then pushing spend harder would have created more leakage, not more growth.
For the Wellness range, the brand already held a strong organic position on the core category term(s), so the basic visibility was there. But the category itself was super competitive, with search volume down year on year on core search terms, general demand had softened, and the revenue leader in the category was more than twice the size.
Amongst other tactics, we decided to bid aggressively on the market leader’s brand terms and try to take share, but the economics quickly stopped making sense. The competitor defended heavily, CPCs moved above £11, and the cost of that traffic became too high to justify.
These were two opposite problems: one range needed the basics fixed before scaling, while the other needed more discipline, not more spend.
What We Did
We started with the diagnosis, not a standard campaign rebuild.
For the performance nutrition range, we held back the full PPC restructure until the Buy Box issue was resolved in early 2026.
There was no point building new or optimising existing campaigns against a listing that couldn’t reliably capture the sale.
Once the Buy Box was stable, the rebuild went live. We split targeting properly across different match types, kept brand defence lean, and moved budget towards the areas with the clearest upside.
We also tested beyond the obvious category terms, which opened up new acquisition angles with strong early results. But the focus stayed disciplined: scale into terms the data was already validating, rather than chasing every possible keyword.
From there, the job was simple: scale what was already working, rather than chasing every possible keyword, as part of the scaling we also tested a ton of Sponsored Brands and Sponsored Brand Video campaigns as well, whilst performance was solid, they weren’t the main driver by any stretch, with SP campaigns being the key contributor..
For the wellness range, the approach was almost the opposite.
In a softer, yet more competitive category, the temptation is ofren to spend more just to stand still. We chose not to do that.
As a strong brand with good organic visibility, we tested the aggressive play first: bidding against the market leader to try and take share. When CPCs climbed above £11 and the return no longer justified the spend, we pulled back.
Some of the best wins came from looking beyond the obvious terms.
Rather than forcing more budget into the most competitive searches, we found adjacent areas where the products still had relevance, but the cost of traffic was more sensible. This also helped unlock revenue from parts of the range that had previously been doing very little.
Promotional timing also played a role. A promotional window on one product drove a strong uplift in monthly volume and helped recover key organic positions, which we were able to build on in subsequent months.
We also separated branded and non-branded activity, so performance could be judged properly. That made it much clearer where spend was protecting existing demand, where it was acquiring new customers, and where it simply wasn’t delivering profitable sales..
Although both brands have very different problems, most of the improvement on both came from doing the basics properly: cleaning up the structure, bidding with more discipline, aligning promotions with the right products, and separating defence, acquisition and category growth instead of blending everything together.
It doesn’t sound sexy, but it worked. With strong fundamentals, we can now safely test new listing creatives and content and push the growth even further.
The Outcome
Six months in, the account is running at 13.0% ACOS and a blended 5.0% TACOS.
Across the period, c.£29k in ad spend generated c.£220k in attributed ad sales and contributed to £570k+ in total Amazon revenue.
That works out at roughly £20 in total revenue for every £1 spent on ads.
The performance nutrition range has been the standout.
ACOS is running at 9.4% against a 15% target, with ROAS at 10.7x. Monthly ad sales grew from c.£7k in October 2025 to c.£36k in March 2026, a five-fold increase, while ACOS stayed below 12% throughout.
That growth only became possible once the account had a stable base to scale from.
The wellness range has done a different job.
Rather than chasing aggressive growth in a declining category, the focus has been on holding positions, protecting efficiency, and avoiding spend that wouldn’t pay back.
ACOS is in single digits, several products in the range are now generating meaningful revenue with little paid support, and spend is no longer being forced into competitor terms where the economics do not work..
Paid efficiency on the core acquisition products is still being improved, but the structure is now much cleaner. Branded, non-branded and defensive activity are separated properly, which gives the account a much better base to keep improving from.
Summary
This wasn’t a case of applying one PPC playbook across the account.
One range needed the buying journey fixed before it could scale. The other needed more discipline in a tougher market.
By treating each range differently, we helped the account generate £570k+ in Amazon revenue in six months, with c.£220k in attributed ad sales, 13.0% ACOS and a blended 5.0% TACOS.
5.0% blended TACOS
£570k+ Amazon revenue, 6 months
£20 in revenue per £1
of ad spend, blended portfolio
5x ad sales growth
on Hero SKUs, over a 6 month period
9.4% ACOS
on Hero SKUs vs 15% target
5.0% blended TACOS
£570k+ Amazon revenue, 6 months
£20 in revenue per £1
of ad spend, blended portfolio
5x ad sales growth
on Hero SKUs, over a 6 month period
9.4% ACOS
on Hero SKUs vs 15% target
Overview
A UK-based functional beverage brand with two distinct ranges on Amazon UK: one with established demand in performance nutrition, and another operating in a much tougher, more promotion-heavy wellness category.
We took over the account in Q4 2025.
Six months in, the account has delivered £570k+ in Amazon revenue from c.£29k in ad spend, at a TACOS of 5.0%.
The Problem
The previous setup wasn’t obviously broken.
Campaigns were running. Money was being spent. Reports were being produced.
The issue was deeper than that: the account was being managed as one Amazon account, when in reality there were two very different problems across the brands.
Within the first month, it became clear that each range needed a different approach.
For the performance nutrition range, the main issue wasn’t the campaign structure at all. The bigger problem was that third-party sellers had been holding the Buy Box on the flagship product for much of 2025.
That meant more PPC wasn’t the answer yet. If the brand wasn’t consistently winning its own clicks, then pushing spend harder would have created more leakage, not more growth.
For the Wellness range, the brand already held a strong organic position on the core category term(s), so the basic visibility was there. But the category itself was super competitive, with search volume down year on year on core search terms, general demand had softened, and the revenue leader in the category was more than twice the size.
Amongst other tactics, we decided to bid aggressively on the market leader’s brand terms and try to take share, but the economics quickly stopped making sense. The competitor defended heavily, CPCs moved above £11, and the cost of that traffic became too high to justify.
These were two opposite problems: one range needed the basics fixed before scaling, while the other needed more discipline, not more spend.
What We Did
We started with the diagnosis, not a standard campaign rebuild.
For the performance nutrition range, we held back the full PPC restructure until the Buy Box issue was resolved in early 2026.
There was no point building new or optimising existing campaigns against a listing that couldn’t reliably capture the sale.
Once the Buy Box was stable, the rebuild went live. We split targeting properly across different match types, kept brand defence lean, and moved budget towards the areas with the clearest upside.
We also tested beyond the obvious category terms, which opened up new acquisition angles with strong early results. But the focus stayed disciplined: scale into terms the data was already validating, rather than chasing every possible keyword.
From there, the job was simple: scale what was already working, rather than chasing every possible keyword, as part of the scaling we also tested a ton of Sponsored Brands and Sponsored Brand Video campaigns as well, whilst performance was solid, they weren’t the main driver by any stretch, with SP campaigns being the key contributor..
For the wellness range, the approach was almost the opposite.
In a softer, yet more competitive category, the temptation is ofren to spend more just to stand still. We chose not to do that.
As a strong brand with good organic visibility, we tested the aggressive play first: bidding against the market leader to try and take share. When CPCs climbed above £11 and the return no longer justified the spend, we pulled back.
Some of the best wins came from looking beyond the obvious terms.
Rather than forcing more budget into the most competitive searches, we found adjacent areas where the products still had relevance, but the cost of traffic was more sensible. This also helped unlock revenue from parts of the range that had previously been doing very little.
Promotional timing also played a role. A promotional window on one product drove a strong uplift in monthly volume and helped recover key organic positions, which we were able to build on in subsequent months.
We also separated branded and non-branded activity, so performance could be judged properly. That made it much clearer where spend was protecting existing demand, where it was acquiring new customers, and where it simply wasn’t delivering profitable sales..
Although both brands have very different problems, most of the improvement on both came from doing the basics properly: cleaning up the structure, bidding with more discipline, aligning promotions with the right products, and separating defence, acquisition and category growth instead of blending everything together.
It doesn’t sound sexy, but it worked. With strong fundamentals, we can now safely test new listing creatives and content and push the growth even further.
The Outcome
Six months in, the account is running at 13.0% ACOS and a blended 5.0% TACOS.
Across the period, c.£29k in ad spend generated c.£220k in attributed ad sales and contributed to £570k+ in total Amazon revenue.
That works out at roughly £20 in total revenue for every £1 spent on ads.
The performance nutrition range has been the standout.
ACOS is running at 9.4% against a 15% target, with ROAS at 10.7x. Monthly ad sales grew from c.£7k in October 2025 to c.£36k in March 2026, a five-fold increase, while ACOS stayed below 12% throughout.
That growth only became possible once the account had a stable base to scale from.
The wellness range has done a different job.
Rather than chasing aggressive growth in a declining category, the focus has been on holding positions, protecting efficiency, and avoiding spend that wouldn’t pay back.
ACOS is in single digits, several products in the range are now generating meaningful revenue with little paid support, and spend is no longer being forced into competitor terms where the economics do not work..
Paid efficiency on the core acquisition products is still being improved, but the structure is now much cleaner. Branded, non-branded and defensive activity are separated properly, which gives the account a much better base to keep improving from.
Summary
This wasn’t a case of applying one PPC playbook across the account.
One range needed the buying journey fixed before it could scale. The other needed more discipline in a tougher market.
By treating each range differently, we helped the account generate £570k+ in Amazon revenue in six months, with c.£220k in attributed ad sales, 13.0% ACOS and a blended 5.0% TACOS.
5.0% blended TACOS
£570k+ Amazon revenue, 6 months
£20 in revenue per £1
of ad spend, blended portfolio
5x ad sales growth
on Hero SKUs, over a 6 month period
9.4% ACOS
on Hero SKUs vs 15% target