Growth & Strategy
Personas
Ecommerce
Time to ROI
Medium-term (3-6 months)
OK, so you're running an ecommerce store and you've been told to diversify your traffic sources. Everyone's saying "don't put all your eggs in one basket," but here's the thing - most advice on traction channels is complete BS when it comes to ecommerce.
I learned this the hard way when I took on a client who was drowning in Facebook Ad dependency. They had a solid 2.5 ROAS, but their entire revenue engine ran on Meta's algorithm. One policy change, one account suspension, and they'd be dead in the water.
What followed was three months of testing different traction channels, and what I discovered completely changed how I think about ecommerce growth. Spoiler alert: the "diversification" most people preach isn't just wrong - it's actually dangerous for most stores.
Here's what you'll learn from my real-world channel testing:
Why the bullseye framework fails for ecommerce (and what to use instead)
The hidden costs that make "cheap" channels expensive
My exact playbook for testing 12 channels in 90 days
The one channel that saved my client's business (hint: it wasn't paid ads)
When to double down vs when to diversify
This isn't another "try Pinterest and TikTok" listicle. This is what actually happened when I stress-tested every major traction channel for a real business with real money on the line.
Reality Check
What every ecommerce "guru" tells you about traction
Walk into any ecommerce conference and you'll hear the same tired advice about traction channels. The "experts" will tell you to test everything: Facebook ads, Google ads, influencer marketing, content marketing, email, SMS, affiliate programs, partnerships, PR, SEO, referrals, and whatever new platform launched last week.
The conventional wisdom sounds logical: diversify your traffic sources to reduce risk. Don't depend on any single platform. Test small, scale what works, kill what doesn't. Apply the "bullseye framework" and find your three best channels.
Here's what the playbooks typically recommend:
Start with paid ads for immediate results and data
Build organic channels like SEO and content for long-term growth
Add social channels like influencer partnerships and community building
Layer in retention channels like email and SMS
Experiment with emerging platforms to get in early
The theory makes sense, right? Spread your risk, don't put all your eggs in one basket, always be testing. Most agencies will even show you pretty attribution reports proving how each channel contributes to your overall revenue.
But here's what they don't tell you: this approach is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of how ecommerce actually works. The bullseye framework was designed for SaaS companies with high LTV and predictable growth patterns. Ecommerce is different.
Most stores that follow this advice end up spreading themselves too thin, chasing vanity metrics across dozens of channels while never building real momentum in any of them. They optimize for attribution instead of actual profit.
Consider me as your business complice.
7 years of freelance experience working with SaaS and Ecommerce brands.
When I started working with this client - let's call them Store X - they were the poster child for Facebook Ad dependency. Over 90% of their revenue came from Meta ads. Their monthly ad spend was around $50K with that 2.5 ROAS, which looked decent on paper.
But I could see the warning signs everywhere. Their account had been flagged twice in six months. iOS changes were making attribution messy. Ad costs were creeping up. The founder was losing sleep every time Facebook updated their policies.
The brief was simple: "Help us diversify so we're not so dependent on Facebook." Seemed straightforward enough. I'd done channel diversification before, and the playbook was clear - test everything, scale what works.
What I didn't expect was how quickly this turned into a masterclass in why most ecommerce traction advice is wrong.
The first red flag came with Google Ads. Everyone said it was the "obvious" alternative to Facebook. We launched Shopping campaigns, Search campaigns, Display - the works. The traffic quality was decent, but the economics were brutal. While Facebook ads had customer data and lookalike audiences, Google was essentially cold traffic with search intent.
The conversion rates were lower, the average order values were similar, but the CPCs were 40% higher. We were burning money trying to make Google work at the same ROAS as Facebook.
Then came the "organic" channels. I invested in a complete SEO overhaul - new content strategy, technical optimization, link building. The client had over 1,000 SKUs, so there was potential for massive long-tail traffic.
SEO started showing promise after month two, but here's what nobody tells you: organic traffic converts differently than paid traffic. The attribution was messier, the customer journey was longer, and the revenue was harder to predict.
Meanwhile, Facebook was still doing most of the heavy lifting. But now we were spreading budget and attention across multiple channels, and Facebook performance started declining. The algorithm needs consistent spend to work well, and we were essentially starving it while feeding other channels.
By month two, I realized we were making a classic mistake: we were treating all channels like they were equal, when they're actually fundamentally different.
Here's my playbook
What I ended up doing and the results.
After testing 12 different traction channels over three months, I learned something that changed how I think about ecommerce growth entirely: channels have physics, not just metrics.
What I mean is this - each channel has built-in characteristics that determine how it behaves, regardless of how well you optimize it. You can't change these physics, you can only work with them.
Here's my actual testing framework that saved Store X:
Phase 1: Channel Physics Audit (Week 1-2)
Instead of testing channels randomly, I mapped each one based on three physics:
Speed to results: How quickly can you get meaningful data?
Scalability ceiling: What's the maximum potential of this channel?
Control level: How much can you directly influence performance?
Facebook scored high on speed and control, medium on scalability. Google Ads scored medium across all three. SEO scored low on speed, high on scalability, low on control.
Phase 2: The 80/20 Realization (Week 3-6)
This is where everything clicked. Instead of trying to make every channel work, I focused on making one channel work really, really well, then building complementary channels around it.
For Store X, Facebook wasn't the problem - it was the solution. The issue was that we were treating it like a single channel when it's actually an ecosystem. Instead of diversifying away from Facebook, we diversified within Facebook.
We launched Instagram campaigns, Messenger ads, Facebook Shops, retargeting sequences, lookalike audiences based on different customer segments. We were still on Meta's platform, but we weren't dependent on any single campaign type or audience.
Phase 3: The SEO Breakthrough (Week 7-12)
Meanwhile, SEO was quietly building momentum. But here's the key insight: I didn't treat SEO as a Facebook replacement. I treated it as a Facebook amplifier.
The organic traffic didn't need to convert at the same rate as Facebook traffic. It just needed to get people into our ecosystem where Facebook could retarget them. Suddenly, our "cold" Facebook campaigns were performing better because our audience pools were larger and more qualified.
We went from seeing Facebook attributed ROAS jump from 2.5 to 8-9 within a month of implementing the SEO strategy. Was this accurate attribution? Probably not. But the total business revenue was growing, and that's what mattered.
Phase 4: Email as the Revenue Multiplier (Week 9-12)
Email marketing was the final piece. Instead of treating it as a separate channel, we used it to increase the lifetime value of customers acquired through our main channels.
We built automated sequences that were triggered by Facebook ad clicks, SEO page visits, and customer behaviors. Email wasn't generating new customers - it was making our existing acquisition channels more profitable.
Channel Physics
Each traction channel has built-in characteristics you can't change. Facebook ads need consistent spend and data. SEO rewards patient discovery. Email multiplies existing relationships.
Platform Ecosystem
Don't diversify away from what works - diversify within it. Facebook isn't one channel, it's an ecosystem of Instagram, Messenger, Shops, and retargeting options.
Attribution Lies
Your attribution model will lie to you. Focus on total business growth rather than trying to perfectly track which channel deserves credit for each sale.
Amplification Strategy
The best "new" channels don't replace your main channel - they amplify it. SEO traffic makes Facebook retargeting more effective.
The results from this channel physics approach were dramatic. Within three months, Store X had transformed from a Facebook-dependent business into what I call a "Facebook-amplified" business.
The numbers:
Facebook attributed ROAS increased from 2.5 to 8-9 (largely due to better audience pools from SEO)
Total organic traffic grew from 300 to 5,000+ monthly visitors
Email revenue increased by 340% through better acquisition channel integration
Overall business revenue grew 60% while reducing actual dependency risk
But the real win wasn't the numbers - it was the risk reduction. Store X was no longer dependent on Facebook policy changes because they had multiple traffic sources feeding their ecosystem. If Facebook shut down tomorrow, they'd take a hit, but they wouldn't die.
More importantly, each channel was now making the others more effective. SEO traffic improved Facebook's audience data. Email sequences extended the value of paid traffic. The whole system was greater than the sum of its parts.
This approach worked because we stopped fighting channel physics and started working with them. We didn't try to make SEO perform like Facebook or make Google Ads replace organic traffic. We built a system where each channel played to its strengths.
What I've learned and the mistakes I've made.
Sharing so you don't make them.
Testing 12 traction channels in 90 days taught me lessons that completely changed how I approach ecommerce growth:
Channel diversification ≠ channel replacement. The goal isn't to find alternatives to what works - it's to find amplifiers.
Physics beats tactics every time. You can't optimize your way around a channel's fundamental characteristics.
Attribution is a vanity metric. Total business growth matters more than perfect channel tracking.
Ecosystem thinking trumps channel thinking. Facebook isn't one channel - it's Instagram, Messenger, Shops, and retargeting combined.
Sequential scaling beats parallel scaling. Master one channel deeply before adding complexity.
Customer journey complexity increases with channel count. More channels can actually hurt conversion if not integrated properly.
The dark funnel is real. Customers touch multiple channels before buying, making single-channel attribution impossible.
If I had to do this project again, I'd start with the 80/20 rule: identify your best-performing channel and exhaust its potential before diversifying. Then build complementary channels that amplify your main channel rather than compete with it.
The biggest mistake most stores make is spreading their efforts too thin across channels that work differently, instead of building systems where channels work together.
How you can adapt this to your Business
My playbook, condensed for your use case.
For your SaaS / Startup
For SaaS companies looking at traction channels:
Focus on content and SEO for long-term compound growth
Use LinkedIn for B2B audience building and thought leadership
Build email sequences that nurture over longer sales cycles
Test partnerships and integrations for ecosystem plays
For your Ecommerce store
For ecommerce stores, prioritize channels in this order:
Master one paid channel (usually Facebook or Google) before diversifying
Build SEO as an amplifier, not a replacement for paid traffic
Use email and SMS to increase LTV of acquired customers
Test emerging platforms only after core channels are optimized