Meta drives volume and lower CPL for mass-affluent IFA enquiries; Google Search drives higher-intent leads at 1.8-2.6x CPL. Most scaled IFAs run both, tilting toward Google for HNW.
For IFAs with a mass-affluent book, Meta is the primary channel: lower CPL, richer targeting, and room to scale creatively. For HNW, chartered-planner, or pension-transfer focused firms, Google Search carries the weight - intent is explicit and conversion to fee-signed is 1.4-2.1x higher. Start with 60% Meta / 30% Google / 10% retargeting; rebalance based on 90-day downstream data (fee-signed not MQLs).
Meta wins when your creative is strong, your audience is broad enough for ML optimisation, and you have 2k+ pounds/month to exit the learning phase. Best niches: protection, mortgage broking, equity release, retirement planning, mass-affluent IFA.
Google wins when intent is explicit, niche is niche, and LTVs are high enough to absorb 200-400 pounds CPLs. Best niches: DB pension transfer, HNW wealth, chartered planning, niche specialist (BTL limited co, cross-border).
- Meta for volume + top-of-funnel - Google for intent + bottom-of-funnel - Shared retargeting layer - Offline conversion feedback on both
Measured on client acquisition, not CPL.
Want a second opinion on your channel mix?
Model paid-media scenarios with real adviser CPL and MQL benchmarks.