A framing example, not a customer result: "You spent €100k on Meta and Google. Here's what actually produced the €300k that hit your bank account." Call it an example, then use their deposits. Both platforms can claim the sale. Do not add the reports.
The meeting: two ad accounts, one bank account
What the client sees if you read the two reports as one total
A number bigger than the payout. They stop trusting the chart.
Thexly's sample account, not an industry average and not a client result: Meta $12,400, Google $9,800, combined $22,200, Stripe $14,600, gap $7,600. Combined claims can sit above payment revenue. Do not copy $7,600 onto a prospect.
How both platforms can claim the same sale
A Meta click, a later Google click, one purchase. Each platform credits a role its rules allow. The processor records one charge. You do not need to settle whose model is "right." Stop adding.
A common version of this on Reddit: Meta says 4x ROAS but the bank disagrees.
A common version of this on Reddit: why ad data gets harder to trust as spend grows.
What to show instead of a summed revenue slide
| Line | What it is |
|---|---|
| Meta spend | Meta export, dates on the slide |
| Meta claimed value | Meta only, setting labeled |
| Google spend | Google export, same dates |
| Google claimed value | Google only, conversion actions labeled |
| Payment revenue | Cleared charges, once |
No total-revenue row that adds the claims. A live view beats a stale PDF: agency client reporting from payment revenue.
Where each platform's report still helps (ads operations, not the bank total)
Meta's report buys Meta: creative, frequency, learning, placement. Google's report buys Google: keywords, bids, campaign type, impression share. That is operations. ROAS stays next to its own spend when you plan the week. It leaves the slide that answers what they made.
Payment revenue as the figure the client can check
They can find the processor number on a statement. They cannot find a summed ROAS there. Claims beside payment revenue. The client total does not add the overlap. No first-touch, last-touch, or multi-touch method on this page. Thexly for agencies is the shared report. Pricing. A nearly all Shopify-native DTC book may want a different stack.
What this does to blended ROAS talk in the same QBR
One cross-account efficiency number is a different sheet: blended ROAS and MER versus platform ROAS. Do not add the two claimed revenues and divide by combined spend. If you quote a program figure, revenue in it is payment revenue, once.
What Thexly does and does not do with those two reports
Payment revenue beside both reports, in a live share. Thexly does not upload conversions, run CAPI or Conversion API, sync spend or platform ROAS, set either window, or apply a multi-touch model to erase the overlap. The reports can still both claim the sale. The meeting refuses the sum.
Already in Sheets or Looker? That comparison. Keep the sheet when payment revenue is the numerator.
FAQ
Why do Facebook and Google both take credit for one order?
Each counts a click or view under its own rules. One person can do both. The processor records one charge.
Should the client pick a winner between the two platforms from those two totals?
No. Operate each account from its report. Use payment revenue for money received.
What number do I put next to the combined spend?
Payment revenue for those dates. Label the two spends under the cost line. Do not add claimed revenue.
Is a higher platform ROAS the same as more money in the bank?
No. ROAS uses that platform's claimed value. The bank uses settled charges.
Does Thexly upload conversions so the platforms stop overlapping?
No. Overlap can remain. The client total still must not add the two columns.
Is the €100k spend / €300k bank line a customer result?
No. A framing example only. The dollar figures above are a sample account on thexly.com, not that euro line and not an industry average.
What do you put next to combined spend when both reports claim the order?