Custom Sticker Shop · Google Ads YoY & Tracking Assessment

Bottom line Reported results up, but it's an AOV story we must validate before crediting the tracking

Since the clean WeTrack.io tracking went live on Sep 9, 2025, Google reported results jumped from declining year over year to clearly growing: revenue +29% ($312,120 → $403,259) on +27% spend, with reported ROAS holding at target (2.01x). On paper that is a strong, positive swing.

But almost the entire swing is one number: Average Order Value (+24%). Order volume grew only +4% on +27% more spend, so cost per order rose and conversion rate dipped. The revenue story is an AOV story, and AOV is the metric most easily moved by a measurement change. We confirmed at the conversion action level that this is a clean tracker swap: last year two legacy trackers independently measured AOV at ~$24; the new WeTrack action reads ~$30 on a nearly identical order count. An AOV that moves only when the tracker changes, not the order count, is the fingerprint of a value measurement change, not 29% more sales.

Our honest read: from the ad platform data alone we can't yet tell whether this is real growth or simply more complete measurement, so we won't claim it's all down to the new tracking until we've confirmed it. Two explanations are still in play: (a) your store genuinely earned a higher AOV, through upsells, cross sells, bundles, or price changes, and the platforms are now reflecting it; or (b) the new tracking simply reports a higher AOV (for example, WeTrack passing the full order total including tax & shipping where the old setup sent only the subtotal) while the real value of each order is unchanged. One number decides between them: your actual WooCommerce store AOV, this year vs last. If it rose too → the growth is real. If it's flat while the ad platforms jumped → it's measurement. The full decision guide is in the final section.

The headline: Sep 9 → Jun 29, year over year

Same calendar window, this year vs last. Metrics are split by whether the Sep 9 tracking change can affect them.

Tracking independent Set by the ad auction & our management, unaffected by which conversion tracker is used. The cleanest read on real activity.

Ad Spend

$200,351

vs $158,373 prior yr

▲ +26.5%

Impressions

27,892,401

vs 25,582,961 prior yr

▲ +9.0%

Clicks

386,971

vs 350,312 prior yr

▲ +10.5%

Avg. CPC

$0.52

vs $0.45 prior yr

▲ +14.5%

CTR

1.39%

vs 1.37% prior yr

▲ +1.3%

Tracking dependent Defined by the conversion tracker, a change here can reflect better measurement, better performance, or both.

Revenue (Google tracked)

$403,259

vs $312,120 prior yr

▲ +29.2%

Conversions (Orders)

13,480

vs 12,966 prior yr

▲ +4.0%

Avg. Order Value

$29.92

vs $24.07 prior yr

▲ +24.3%

Conversion Rate

3.48%

vs 3.70% prior yr

▼ -5.9%

ROAS

2.01x

vs 1.97x prior yr

▲ +2.1%

Cost / Conversion

$14.86

vs $12.21 prior yr

▲ +21.7%

Revenue / Click

$1.04

vs $0.89 prior yr

▲ +17.0%

The smoking gun: a clean break exactly at the switch

Monthly Google tracked revenue vs the same month a year earlier. Before Sep 9, both years ran the same old tracking (a true apples to apples comparison), and the account was declining. The instant the new tracking went live, YoY flipped positive and stayed there.

Each bar = that month's revenue vs the prior year. Red = down YoY, green = up YoY. ▨ Sep 2025 is hatched because it is a transition month (the old duplicate tags fired Sep 1 to 8, inflating it to ~$71K / ~15,000 conversions, a one off artifact, excluded from all averages below).

Average revenue YoY, before vs after the switch (Sep transition excluded):
Before the switch (Jan to Aug 2025, old tracking both years): -23.2% → After the switch (Oct 2025 to Jun 2026): +35.0%. A swing of ~58 points that lands precisely on the tracking change is the central piece of evidence, but note it appears in revenue far more than in order count (conversions: -22.6% → +9.0%).

The AOV timing test: does the jump line up with the switch?

Since the entire revenue swing rides on AOV, the key question is why AOV rose. The one thing that points specifically to tracking is timing: if it were the new measurement, Google reported AOV should step up immediately the month WeTrack went live, not drift up gradually. It did exactly that.

Google reported AOV by month (revenue ÷ orders). Under the old tracking (red) AOV sat flat at ~$24 for eight straight months. The first clean month on WeTrack (Oct 2025, green) jumps to $29 and climbs to $33, a clean level shift right at the switch. ○ Sep 2025 is hollow (transition month, distorted by the Sep 1 to 8 duplicate tags).

Drilling into the conversion actions themselves makes the point even sharper. Comparing the primary purchase action each year, same Sep 9 to Jun 29 window:

Primary purchase tracker	Orders	Revenue	AOV
Legacy `purchase` action · last yr	12,932	$312,084	$24.13
Legacy GA4 Purchase action · last yr (secondary)	11,685	$285,867	$24.46
WeTrack `Purchase wetracked ilo` · this yr	13,482	$403,366	$29.92

Last year, two independent trackers agreed AOV was ~$24. A real AOV increase does not care which pixel is installed, it would show up regardless of tracker. AOV moving to ~$30 only when the tracker changed, on a near identical order count, with the two old trackers corroborating the lower figure, points to a change in how order value is recorded rather than a change in what customers actually paid.

Important caveat: a step up at the switch is necessary evidence, but not sufficient on its own. An immediate jump is consistent with tracking, but it could also coincide with a real change you made around the same time. AOV can rise for three very different reasons, and they mean different things:

Better tracking (measurement). WeTrack now records order value more completely, on both Meta and Google. Tell tale: platform reported AOV steps up on both platforms at go live, while actual WooCommerce store AOV stays roughly flat.
A genuine store wide AOV change: pricing, product mix, promos, new higher value SKUs. This is real money, but it is not created by the ads or the tracking. Tell tale: your actual WooCommerce store AOV is also up, and it lines up with a pricing or catalog change you'll recognize.
Better ad targeting bringing higher value buyers. Would show as store AOV up and concentrated in paid traffic, the hardest to isolate.

How to tell which it is: compare your real WooCommerce order values against what the ad platforms now report, and check whether anything changed on your side around September 2025. If your store's actual AOV is flat and only the ad platforms jumped, it's the tracking. If your store AOV moved too, something real changed, and the credit belongs to that, not the tags. The checklist at the end walks through exactly what to pull.

What WeTrack sells vs. what we observed

We reviewed WeTrack.io's own marketing to see whether the data lines up with what the tool claims to do. It doesn't quite, and that gap matters.

📣 What they sell

A recovery / accuracy pitch.

"Pushes 100% accurate data into your ads manager," going "from 40% to 100% accuracy."
"Adblock proof," "first party tracking," recovering the sales that broken cookie tracking hides from the ad platforms.
This is fundamentally a volume recovery story: capture conversions the old setup was missing.

🔎 What we observed

The opposite footprint.

Order count barely moved (+4%), there is no volume recovery in the data. If WeTrack took this account "40%→100%," orders should have jumped sharply. They didn't.
The whole effect is in AOV (+24%), a value shift, which is not the headline thing they advertise.
Most likely mechanic: a value mapping difference, WeTrack reads the full WooCommerce order total (tax + shipping included) while the old GA4/pixel sent the subtotal. Their site says nothing about tax/shipping; it's an implementation detail, and differing purchase value handling across WooCommerce plugins is a well documented issue.

Why this strengthens the caution. The effect we measured (a value/AOV jump) isn't even the capability WeTrack primarily markets (conversion recovery). That makes a clean "the tracking recovered our true performance" narrative harder to support, and points back to the same unresolved question: is the higher AOV real money, or just the full order total now being passed where a partial one used to be?

What's real vs. what's better measurement

✅ Likely real improvement

Supported by tracking independent signals and by holding return while scaling.

We scaled spend +27% ($158,373→$200,351) and the account absorbed it at target ROAS (2.0x) rather than collapsing.
Clicks +10.5% and impressions +9%, more real traffic captured, not just a reporting change.
Incremental math: +$41,978 spend produced +$91,139 tracked revenue, a marginal 2.17x, in line with the account target.
Cleaner conversion signal genuinely helps Smart Bidding optimize, a real, compounding benefit even when it shows up as "measurement."

📐 Likely measurement effect

Where the YoY gain is inflated by the methodology change, not more sales.

AOV +24% ($24.07→$29.92) is the main driver of the revenue lift, value per order, the metric most directly redefined by new tracking.
Order volume only +4% on +27% spend → cost/order +22% and conversion rate −5.9%. On pure volume we did not get more efficient.
The revenue jump (+29%) is far larger than the order jump (+4%); if growth were purely demand driven, order count would have risen too.
The break is a step change at the switch date, not a gradual trend, typical of a measurement reset.

The stakes: if the AOV lift is measurement, the scaling looks very different. Smart Bidding optimizes toward conversion value. If WeTrack inflated reported value by ~24% without real money behind it, the bidder would automatically spend up chasing the bigger number, which is exactly the pattern we see (spend +27%, but CPA +22%, CVR −6%, orders flat). Run that scenario through the math:

True ROAS would be ~2.01 ÷ 1.24 ≈ 1.6x, below the 2.0x target, not at it.
Real revenue growth would be only ~+4.0% (this year's 13,480 orders revalued at last year's $24.07 AOV = $324,483 vs $312,120), i.e. we spent +27% to grow real revenue ~4%.

The same Google data is consistent with both "profitable scaling against real higher value orders" and "overspending against inflated values." Only actual WooCommerce AOV tells us which, see the decision tree below.

Rising costs are a real headwind (and not about tracking)

One genuinely independent trend worth flagging to set expectations.

Metric	This year	Last year	YoY	Read
Avg. CPC	$0.52	$0.45	+14.5%	Auction is more expensive YoY
CTR	1.39%	1.37%	+1.3%	Creative/relevance holding steady
Spend	$200,351	$158,373	+26.5%	~½ from more clicks, ~½ from pricier clicks

CPC rose +14.5% with CTR flat, so the spend increase is roughly half "we bought more traffic" and half "traffic got more expensive." That cost pressure is market wide and would have squeezed results regardless of tracking, making the post switch growth more notable, but also meaning volume efficiency naturally tightened.

What we recommend you do with this

We can see everything inside Google Ads, but we don't have access to your WooCommerce store or your Meta account, and that's exactly where the answer lives. These three short checks on your end will tell you both whether this year's growth is real and whether WeTrack is worth keeping.

1 · Is WeTrack reporting the truth? this is the keep or remove question

Pull your actual average order value in WooCommerce since Sep 9, 2025 and compare it to the ~$29.92 WeTrack is reporting into Google.

They roughly match → WeTrack is accurate. Keep it. Clean, complete order value data genuinely helps Google and Meta bid toward real revenue.
WeTrack's number is clearly higher than your real order value → it's inflating (most likely adding tax + shipping, or double counting). That overstates ROAS and can quietly push the platforms to overspend. Get the value mapping fixed, or remove it.

2 · Did the business actually grow, or did the number just change?

Compare your WooCommerce AOV for Sep 9 to Jun 29 this year vs the same window last year.

Up ~24% as well → real growth. Your higher order values are genuine and the added ad spend was scaling against real value.
Roughly flat → the $24 → $30 jump is the tracking reporting differently, not more money per order. Your true year over year growth is closer to the +4% rise in order count.

3 · Two quick gut checks that explain it fast

Did you change anything around September 2025? Added upsells, cross sells, or bundles, or raised prices? A "yes" is the simplest explanation for a genuinely higher AOV.
Check Meta Events Manager: did your reported AOV there also jump right when WeTrack was installed? If both ad platforms stepped up together while your store's real AOV stayed flat, that confirms it's the tracking, not the business.

The bottom line: keep or remove WeTrack

Keep it if its reported order value matches your real WooCommerce order value. Accurate, complete tracking is worth paying for, it's what lets the platforms optimize toward true revenue.
Remove it (or fix the mapping) if it reports materially more than your real order totals. Inflated values make ROAS look better than it is and can drive overspending.
On the results either way: count this year's gain as "real growth" only to the extent your actual WooCommerce AOV rose year over year. If your store AOV is flat, the headline +29% is mostly measurement and real growth is nearer +4%.

On our side, we'll rebaseline your Google Ads reporting from Oct 1, 2025 so it excludes the September transition spike, and keep watching order volume and conversion rate, the metrics that show real, channel independent growth. Send us what you find on checks 1 to 3 and we'll lock the verdict with you.

Methodology. Source: Google Ads API, account 509-537-1816 (Custom Sticker Shop), account timezone America/New_York. Windows: Sep 9 to Jun 29 for each year (Sep counts from the 9th; Jun through the 29th) so both periods cover identical calendar spans. Revenue = conversion value; Conversions = all tracked conversions; AOV = value ÷ conversions; ROAS = value ÷ cost; figures from new (WeTrack.io) tracking for 2025/26 and prior tracking for 2024/25. Monthly discontinuity chart uses full calendar month totals; Sep 2025 is a known transition artifact (old duplicate tags active Sep 1 to 8) and is excluded from pre/post averages. Tracking dependent metrics are not strictly comparable across the methodology change, see caveats. Conversion action figures are from segments.conversion_action_name pulls over the same windows; WeTrack.io capability claims are from wetracked.io marketing pages reviewed Jun 30, 2026. Tax/shipping value mapping and store AOV statements are hypotheses to be confirmed against WooCommerce. Prepared by Easton Digital.