Marketing

Channel Performance Comparison

Compares marketing channels side by side across cost, conversion, and revenue metrics. Assigns a composite performance score to each channel and auto-ranks them so you can quickly see which channels outperform and which underperform.

Marketing - Channel Performance Comparison.xlsx

Excel (.xlsx) — No macros — Works in Excel, Google Sheets, LibreOffice

Download Free

What This Spreadsheet Solves

Metrics live in separate dashboards making cross-channel comparison manual
No standardized scoring system to compare fundamentally different channels
Channel selection decisions rely on a single metric instead of a balanced view
Cannot quickly identify the weakest channel to cut or the strongest to scale
No repeatable framework for monthly or quarterly channel reviews

Who This Is For

Marketing managers running multi-channel programs
Performance marketers comparing paid channels
CMOs preparing channel review presentations

Inputs

textChannel Name
$Total Spend
$Total Revenue Attributed
#Total Conversions
#Total Impressions / Reach

Outputs

ROAS per channel
Cost per conversion per channel
Conversion rate per channel
Composite performance score (0-100)
Auto-ranked channel list

How Calculations Work

Each metric (ROAS, cost per conversion, conversion rate) is normalized to a 0-100 scale across all channels. The composite score is a weighted average of these normalized values. Weights are configurable. Channels are then sorted by composite score to produce the final ranking.

Example Use Case

Scenario: Three channels: Google Ads ($10,000 spend, $35,000 revenue, 140 conversions, 500,000 impressions), Facebook Ads ($8,000 spend, $16,000 revenue, 200 conversions, 1,200,000 impressions), Email ($1,500 spend, $12,000 revenue, 300 conversions, 50,000 sends).

Result: Composite scores: Email 92, Google Ads 74, Facebook Ads 51. Email ranks #1 due to highest ROAS (8.0x) and lowest cost per conversion ($5). Facebook ranks last despite high impression volume.

What You Get — 5 Sheets

READMEDescribes the normalization method, composite scoring formula, and how to adjust metric weights.

INPUTOne row per channel with spend, revenue, conversions, and impressions fields.

LOGICNormalizes each metric to 0-100, applies configurable weights, and computes composite score per channel.

OUTPUTRanked channel table with individual metrics, normalized scores, and composite score. Includes bar chart data.

CONFIGMetric weight sliders, normalization method toggle (min-max vs. z-score), and display currency.

Technical Details

File Format:.xlsx (Open XML)

Macros:None — pure formulas

Compatibility:Excel 2016+, Google Sheets, LibreOffice

Input Cells:Clearly marked with blue background

Formulas:All outputs are live Excel formulas

Protection:LOGIC sheet formulas protected, INPUT cells editable

Frequently Asked Questions

How are the metric weights set?

Default weights are equal (33% each for ROAS, cost per conversion, conversion rate). Adjust them in the CONFIG sheet to reflect your priorities.

Can I add custom metrics?

Yes. Add a column on the INPUT sheet and a corresponding weight in CONFIG. The LOGIC sheet normalizes any numeric column automatically.

What normalization method is used?

Min-max normalization by default, scaling each metric to 0-100 based on the lowest and highest values in the dataset. Z-score is available as an alternative in CONFIG.

How do I handle channels with missing data?

Leave the cell blank. The composite score will be calculated using only the available metrics, with weights re-proportioned.

Is a higher composite score always better?

Yes. The scoring inverts cost-based metrics (lower cost = higher score) so that a higher composite always indicates better overall performance.

Download Channel Performance Comparison

Ready to use immediately. Enter your data in the INPUT sheet, see results in OUTPUT.

Download Free (.xlsx)Browse all 100 templates