BRAND WGY AWARENESS • APRIL 2026 • YOUTUBE TRUEVIEW • UK 45+

We Got
You

YouTube burst insights for the April 2026 brand awareness flight. 30 days, 9.6 million impressions, 3.54 million unique adults aged 45+, and a 2.50% absolute brand lift.

CampaignBRAND WGY Awareness April 26 STD1
Flight1–30 April 2026
MarketUnited Kingdom
FormatTrueView Skippable In-Stream, 30s
AudienceBroad Affinity, 45+ (18–44 excluded)
Total Spend£30,899.59

Executive
Summary

The April burst of We Got You on YouTube delivered a strong awareness result. We reached 3.54 million unique UK adults aged 45+, served 9.6 million impressions, and shifted attitudes on 164,944 users at a cost-per-lifted-user of £0.19 and an absolute brand lift of 2.50%. That lift figure sits in the upper part of typical YouTube awareness benchmarks.

01

CTV did most of the brand work

TV screens drove 79% of impressions but 95% of all lifted users, at a £0.16 cost-per-lifted-user. Tablets cost 4.6× more per lifted user. Lean further into CTV in the next burst.

02

55–64s are the most efficient audience

Highest lift, lowest cost-per-lifted-user, and two-thirds of conversions from 18% of impressions. 45–54s watched more than any other age group but the study only captured 346 survey responses for that audience, below the threshold needed to measure lift. That's a data gap, not confirmation that nothing moved.

03

Single creative fatigue emerging

Average frequency of 3.0 looks healthy. Beneath it, 207,000 users (6% of reach) saw the same 30-second ad 10+ times. Shorter variants would reduce wear-out and open new inventory.

SECTION 01

Campaign at a glance

The campaign ran for 30 days, delivering healthy reach and view rates for a UK 45+ audience. The 2.50% absolute brand lift sits in the upper part of the 1.5–3% typical YouTube awareness range.

ABSOLUTE BRAND LIFT 2.50% Upper range of YouTube awareness benchmarks (1.5–3%)
COST PER LIFTED USER £0.19 Competitive for UK 45+ audience
LIFTED USERS 164,944 Attitudes shifted
UNIQUE REACH 3.54M UK adults aged 45+
IMPRESSIONS 9.60M Total served
TRUEVIEW VIEWS 3.31M 30-second views or click
VIEW RATE 34.49% Strong for 30s skippable
AVG FREQUENCY 3.0× Per user across 30 days
TOTAL SPEND £30,900 30 active days
AVERAGE CPM £3.22 Cost per thousand impressions
SURVEY RESPONSES 4,112 Brand lift study
CONVERSIONS 16 Likely view-through assists, not optimisation target
SECTION 02

Connected TV led
the campaign

CTV didn't just deliver scale; it delivered the most efficient brand lift of any device on the buy. TV screens accounted for 79% of impressions and 95% of lifted users at a £0.16 cost-per-lifted-user.

Device Impressions Share View Rate Lifted Users Share of Lift Cost / Lifted User Spend
TV screens 7,578,493 79.0% 36.95% 156,275 94.7% £0.16 £24,403
Mobile Phones 952,425 9.9% 28.00% 16,247 9.9% £0.19 £3,067
Tablets 604,795 6.3% 20.44% 2,616 1.6% £0.74 £1,947
Computers 460,436 4.8% 25.96% 0 n/a £1,483
Total 9,596,149 100% 34.49% 164,944 100% £0.19 £30,900
DEVICE PERFORMANCE — IMPRESSIONS VS LIFTED USERS VS VIEW RATE

Tablets are 4.6× the campaign average

Tablets cost £0.74 per lifted user, nearly five times CTV's £0.16. Despite 6.3% of impressions, they drove only 1.6% of lifted users. The opportunity is to redirect that budget to TV and mobile in the next burst.

Computers delivered no measurable lift

£1,483 of spend returned zero measurable brand lift. Mobile remains the only meaningful reach vehicle beyond CTV at acceptable efficiency, with a £0.19 cost-per-lifted-user in line with the campaign average.

SECTION 03

Audience performance

The Broad Affinity audience delivered meaningfully different results across age groups and genders. The 55–64 audience is the standout on efficiency. The 45–54 audience presents one of the most useful planning questions to come out of this campaign.

AGE PERFORMANCE
Age Impressions View Rate Lifted Users Absolute Lift Cost / Lifted User Conversions
45–54 1,952,176 40.24% 0 Not measurable n/a 0
55–64 1,746,713 36.19% 34,529 2.88% £0.16 10
65+ 2,502,654 31.60% 38,872 2.30% £0.21 2
Unknown* 3,394,606 32.44% 0 Not measurable n/a 4

*Unknown age is largely CTV inventory where individual demographic attribution is not always available.  •  The 45–54 "not measurable" result reflects only 346 brand lift survey responses for that audience, below the threshold for statistical reliability. It does not mean lift did not occur.

AGE GROUP — VIEW RATE & COST PER LIFTED USER

45–54: worth exploring

Highest view rate (40.24%), but the brand lift study only captured 346 survey responses for this audience, below the threshold needed to return a statistically reliable result. The study showing "not measurable" does not mean lift didn't happen; it means there wasn't enough survey data to detect it. This is worth addressing directly in the next burst by building a larger sample for this age group.

55–64: lean in

Highest lift (2.88%), lowest cost-per-lifted-user (£0.16), and 10 of 16 campaign conversions from just 18% of impressions. A bid premium on this audience in the next burst should improve overall efficiency.

65+: efficient but costly

Solid lift (2.30%) but cost-per-lifted-user runs ~30% above campaign average. They're engaging but harder to shift. Worth maintaining as a secondary audience rather than the primary target.

GENDER PERFORMANCE
Male
IMPRESSIONS (SHARE)
4.08M (42.5%)
VIEW RATE
33.58%
ABSOLUTE LIFT
2.29%
COST / LIFTED USER
£0.20
Female
IMPRESSIONS (SHARE)
2.15M (22.4%)
↓ Half the impressions of male
VIEW RATE
39.26%
↑ 17% higher than male
ABSOLUTE LIFT
3.05%
↑ 33% higher than male
COST / LIFTED USER
£0.16
↓ 20% more efficient than male

Female viewers out-performed male on every measurable metric, but received less than half the gendered impressions. Either Broad Affinity is over-indexing on male users in YouTube's pool, or there is a bid weighting effect to address. A gender bid adjustment or complementary audience layer is recommended for the next burst.

SECTION 04

Frequency: signs of
over-exposure

Average frequency of 3.0 looks healthy at the headline level. Beneath it, 207,000 users (6% of reach) saw the same 30-second ad 10 or more times. With a single creative in market, that level of repetition is a wear-out signal.

FrequencyUnique Users% of Reach
1+3,537,169100%
2+1,585,33144.8%
3+990,41228.0%
4+701,14519.8%
5+532,12215.0%
6+420,96411.9%
7+343,0199.7%
8+285,4748.1%
9+241,5666.8%
10+207,4735.9%
FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION — UNIQUE USERS

55% saw it once

Strong one-touch reach, but it also means most budget went into building frequency on an already-reached audience. Without a cap, YouTube's auction keeps serving to users it has already cookied as engaged. Efficient in bid terms, but less so against an awareness objective.

WEEKLY AVERAGE FREQUENCY BUILD

A standard build-and-taper curve. The distribution issue sits at user level, not weekly pacing.

SECTION 05

Geographic delivery

Distribution closely reflects population density and YouTube viewer concentration. Greater London is the main efficiency outlier. Remote regions show high CPCs but represent very small absolute spend.

Region Impressions Clicks CTR Avg CPC Spend
Greater London 1,333,923 2,232 0.17% £1.92 £4,295
West Midlands 523,081 590 0.11% £2.85 £1,684
Greater Manchester 474,174 502 0.11% £3.04 £1,527
West Yorkshire 341,377 341 0.10% £3.22 £1,099
Merseyside 250,444 201 0.08% £4.01 £806
Kent (combined) 233,770 237 0.10% £3.18 £753
Lancashire (combined) 225,177 197 0.09% £3.68 £725
Tyne and Wear 210,570 207 0.10% £3.28 £678
South Yorkshire 186,194 143 0.08% £4.19 £600
Essex (combined) 196,888 174 0.09% £3.24 £634

Colour scale: CTR — green >0.12% amber 0.08–0.12% red <0.08%  |  CPC — green <£3 amber £3–5 red >£5

London outperforms on engagement, not on lift

A 0.17% CTR sits ~70% above the campaign average; £1.92 CPC is ~40% below. This reflects higher YouTube supply density in London rather than a notably higher level of Healthspan interest. Remote islands (Isle of Wight, Orkney) show CPCs of £8–11 but total only £20–60 spend each, a fine-tuning lever rather than a major optimisation.

SECTION 06

Placement context

The campaign served across 243,253 unique YouTube channels. The top 1,000 accounted for 46% of impressions; more than 101,000 channels received exactly one impression. The placement profile is concentrated on UK opinion media, with some brand-safety points to discuss.

Top N PlacementsCumulative Impression Share
Top 107.4%
Top 5016.0%
Top 10020.9%
Top 50036.8%
Top 1,00045.6%
Top 5,00069.3%
Top 10,00079.4%
All 243,253100%

79.5% of all placements (193,477 channels) received fewer than 10 impressions.

PLACEMENT CONCENTRATION CURVE (PARETO)
Placement Impressions View Rate Spend Note
TalkTV101,87162.0%£328On-strategy, strong engagement
GBNews95,68936.1%£308On-strategy, discuss tone
Al Jazeera English82,45445.0%£266Audience match unclear
Sidemen65,72538.5%£212Entertainment / youth skew
MeidasTouch61,98231.7%£200US political content
LBC60,49138.5%£195On-strategy
MS NOW41,76928.8%£135
Al Jazeera Arabic40,01838.1%£129Foreign-language, audience unclear
The All or Nothing with Billy Moore38,75433.3%£125
Daily Express37,72628.8%£121On-strategy
The Mike Graham Show36,36931.7%£117Reputational exposure: confirm
Dan Wootton Outspoken35,82730.3%£115Reputational exposure: confirm
Tousi TV31,87732.8%£103Foreign-language, audience unclear
The Telegraph31,34032.7%£101On-strategy
Green TV Entertainment29,13028.4%£94
CATEGORIES TO DISCUSS: Politically charged UK opinion media Non-UK / foreign-language content US political content Off-target entertainment (WWE, etc.)

Unexpected positive placements

Channel 5 (55% view rate), The News Agents (46%), and several major UK newspaper channels delivered strong engagement at modest cost. History Debunked drove 5 conversions from just 3,856 impressions, a high-intent signal worth exploring in any future response-focused testing.

SECTION 07

Pacing: smooth delivery
with two days to check

The campaign ran cleanly across 30 days. Two daily spikes sit outside the 250–360 click baseline. We'd suggest checking with the trafficking team to confirm whether these were planned changes or auction movements.

9 April: 783 clicks (2.5× daily baseline)  •  21 April: 428 clicks (1.3× daily baseline)  —  Worth a brief check with trafficking to confirm if these were planned audience or budget changes.
DAILY CLICKS — 1–30 APRIL 2026
SECTION 08

Brand lift performance

2.50% absolute brand lift at £0.19 per lifted user is a strong result for a YouTube awareness campaign. The headline is a composite; the audience-level differences are covered in Section 3. What we don't yet have is the lift breakdown by survey question.

"A 2.50% absolute brand lift at £0.19 cost-per-lifted-user. A strong YouTube awareness result, and good early validation that We Got You has commercial weight as a brand platform."

ABSOLUTE BRAND LIFT 2.50% Upper part of 1.5–3% YouTube benchmark range
COST PER LIFTED USER £0.19 Competitive for UK 45+ audience
LIFTED USERS 164,944
SURVEY RESPONSES 4,112 Brand lift study base
SECTION 09

Recommendations
for the next burst

Six actions, prioritised by expected efficiency gain. The creative test and frequency cap together have the clearest evidence base from this campaign's data.

01 Test shorter creative variants alongside the 30-second cut +

A 34.5% view rate means around two-thirds of impressions did not see the message through to completion. Shorter cuts land the core message before most skip behaviour starts and address the wear-out signal in the frequency curve.

  • 6-second bumper (non-skippable): opens additional inventory and bid lanes
  • 15-second cut: delivers brand message before most skip behaviour
  • 20-second cut: closest to existing creative, direct comparison
  • 30-second original: control

Weight delivery roughly evenly. Read view rate by length, view-through to completion, and brand survey response rate per impression after 2–3 weeks.

02 Add a frequency cap of around 4–5 per user per week +

6% of reach saw the same 30-second ad 10+ times. Brand lift studies show diminishing returns after around 4–6 exposures of the same creative. A user-level cap redirects that budget toward incremental reach, particularly effective when paired with the new creative variants.

03 Re-weight device delivery toward CTV and mobile +
  • Increase CTV bid premium to defend and grow the 79% impression share
  • Reduce or remove tablet delivery (4.6× higher cost-per-lifted-user than TV)
  • Re-evaluate computer delivery (no measurable lift on £1,483 spend)
  • Maintain mobile share, the only meaningful reach beyond CTV at acceptable efficiency
04 Re-weight audience delivery by age and gender +
  • Apply a bid premium on 55–64s (highest lift, lowest cost-per-lifted-user)
  • Increase survey sample size for 45–54s: 346 responses was insufficient to measure lift; a larger sample in the next burst will give a reliable read on whether this audience is responding
  • Apply a gender bid adjustment toward female viewers (33% higher lift, 20% lower cost, under-delivered)
05 Apply placement controls and explore a managed inclusion list +

Agree a placement exclusion list covering: politically polarising opinion media, foreign-language content with unclear audience match, and off-target entertainment.

Consider a curated inclusion list of top-performing UK news channels (TalkTV, GBNews, LBC, Channel 5, The News Agents, Daily Mail News) as a parallel ad group, to evaluate whether managed placements outperform Broad Affinity in lift terms.

06 Hold ~10% of budget as a controlled test pot +

Ring-fence approximately 10% of the next burst budget for the creative variant test as a clean controlled split. This keeps the test from being absorbed into main delivery and produces comparative data to inform the burst after that.