Data · Refreshed quarterly

UK Financial Marketing Benchmarks

Range-based, percentile-derived CPL, CTR, CPM and conversion benchmarks across Meta, Google, Microsoft and LinkedIn for UK regulated financial advice niches. Every row is labelled with a confidence tier and a full methodology.

Quick answer

What are UK financial services marketing benchmarks?

Anonymised, percentile-derived ranges for cost per lead, CTR, CPM and conversion across UK regulated financial advice niches on Meta, Google, Microsoft and LinkedIn. Channel-level aggregate CPLs vary significantly by niche and platform: consumer mortgage niches tend toward the lower end of the range, high-value adviser intent niches toward the upper end. Every row is labelled Strong, Moderate or Directional based on sample depth and derivation path.

Definition

What is Financial Services Marketing Benchmarks?

Anonymised 20th-80th-percentile ranges for paid media performance across the regulated UK advice niches firms run campaigns in, with explicit confidence tiers, methodology, and published exclusions.

2026 Report Insight

2026

UK Financial Lead Generation Intelligence Report

These benchmarks share methodology with the 2026 UK Financial Lead Generation Intelligence Report: metric-level ranges built from UK regulated-firm campaigns meeting the publication threshold across Google, Microsoft, Meta and LinkedIn, with outliers removed and a confidence tier assigned to every published row. Per-metric sample size is disclosed alongside each row.

Open the annual report

Benchmark reports

UK Financial Adviser Lead Generation Benchmarks 2026

Cost-per-lead, CTR and conversion ranges across the regulated advice niches UK IFAs most commonly serve, updated for 2026.

View benchmarks

Mortgage Broker PPC Benchmarks UK

Cost-per-lead and conversion benchmarks for UK mortgage broker paid campaigns across Meta and Google.

View benchmarks

Wealth Management Conversion Rates

Landing-page and lead-to-client conversion rates for UK wealth management campaigns.

View benchmarks

Average Cost Per Lead by Financial Sector

Side-by-side CPL comparison across every major UK financial services sector.

View benchmarks

Microsoft Ads Benchmarks for UK Financial Services 2026

CPC, CPL, CTR and CVR ranges for Microsoft Advertising across UK regulated financial services niches. Typically 20-28% below Google Search CPC with older, higher-income audiences.

View benchmarks

How to read these benchmarks

Four row types, three confidence tiers

AggregateStrong

A pooled channel-level rollup (e.g. all UK advice on Google CPL). Best used for planning and top-down sizing. Large sample, low variance.

ObservedModerate

A specific niche measured directly. Robust for comparison but sample is niche-sized so treat the range seriously, not the midpoint.

GroupedModerate

A niche row modelled from the parent channel distribution using comparable niches and scaling factors. Reliable for sizing; not a single-niche measurement.

DirectionalDirectional

Shown for shape and relative comparison only. Do not use as a budget figure. Low sample or sparse measurement.

Use the range, not the midpoint. The lower bound reflects best-in-class; the upper bound reflects a properly-optimised account, not neglected spend. If your number is outside the range entirely, the first question is whether you are comparing like-for-like across platforms.

Aggregate and Observed rows are safe for planning. Grouped rows are safe for sizing but should be validated with a pilot. Directional rows inform strategy, not targets.

Headline numbers

Channel-level rollups across UK advice niches. Where a published aggregate exists it is shown as-is. Where one does not, we compute the 20th-80th percentile across underlying niches and label the tile as Computed.

Meta CPL

Not published this cycle

Google CPL

Not published this cycle

Microsoft CPL

Not published this cycle

LinkedIn CPL

Not published this cycle

MQL-to-Client

Not published this cycle

Computed rollups use the same percentile logic described in the methodology panel; the underlying niche rows are all present in the explorer below.

Full benchmark explorer

0 published rows across 0 niches, 0 platforms and 0 segments. Composition: 0 aggregate · 0 observed · 0 grouped · 0 directional.

Strong

Safe for planning and targets.

Moderate

Use range, validate with pilot.

Directional

Shape only, not a budget figure.

Benchmarks coming soon

Benchmarks FAQ

What does "sample size" (n=) mean on these benchmarks?

Sample size (n=) is the number of distinct UK ad accounts or campaign-periods aggregated for that row. Aggregate and Observed rows show a real niche-level or channel-level sample. Grouped and Directional rows are derived from the parent channel aggregate plus the niche opportunity dataset, so the niche-level sample is not applicable and the Sample column shows a dash — the reliability signal is the Directional confidence tier, not a sample figure.

What is the difference between Aggregate, Observed, Grouped and Directional rows?

Aggregate = a channel-wide rollup (e.g. all UK advice niches on Google CPL) with large pooled sample and Strong confidence. Observed = a specific niche row derived from direct measurement on that niche. Grouped = a niche row modelled from the parent channel distribution using comparable-niche scaling; reliable for sizing but not a single-niche measurement. Directional = shown for shape and relative comparison only; do not use as a planning figure.

Why are Meta CPL figures so much lower than Google or LinkedIn?

Meta lead-form ads capture interest at a top-of-funnel moment, often with a soft offer. Google Search captures high-intent users further down the funnel. LinkedIn targets professional audiences with strict targeting and premium CPMs. A £10 Meta lead is not the same asset class as a £140 Google search lead; compare like with like.

Why do you publish ranges rather than a single number?

A single number hides variance. We publish the 20th-80th percentile of the underlying distribution after winsorisation so you see what a well-run account actually achieves, not an outlier-driven average. The lower bound is achievable best-in-class; the upper bound reflects properly-optimised campaigns rather than neglected accounts.

How often is this data refreshed?

Quarterly. The methodology panel on this page shows the active version and effective date. Headline channel-level rollups are recalculated every 90 days using Platinum Prospects-managed UK accounts plus anonymised partner data.

Do these figures include VAT?

No. All media costs are shown ex-VAT. VAT applies to agency and creative fees but not to media spend on Meta/Google/LinkedIn where you are the advertiser of record.

Why are some Wealth Management Meta figures not published?

Ultra-HNW and family-office work does not convert reliably on Meta. Where we show no Meta data, it is because we consider the channel non-viable for that segment rather than because we lack the measurement. Honest absence is more useful than a misleading figure.

What counts as "a lead" for CPL purposes?

A lead is a form submission with valid contact details (name, email and phone) that passes basic validation. It is not a booked call or a qualified prospect. MQL rate and MQL-to-client rate in the cross-channel rows show the downstream conversion.

How should I use these benchmarks if my CPL is higher?

First check you are comparing like-for-like (Meta lead-form vs Google Search are different metrics). Second, the upper bound of the range represents well-optimised campaigns, and the lower bound is best-in-class. If your CPL exceeds the upper bound, investigate creative, landing page, audience, compliance overlay or pixel quality before assuming the channel is broken.

Stress-test your own niche

Plug your spend, deal value and conversion into the same benchmark ranges with our Lead Forecast Simulator and see payback projections grounded in this dataset.

Open Lead Forecast Simulator Read the 2026 report