SEEQ Supply: Produced Video vs Creator Content, Tested in the Same Meta Campaign
We ran SEEQ's produced videos and their own creator content in the same Meta campaign, to the same audience, for the same cost. Both stopped the scroll equally well. People watched our videos 3.4x longer, which built a much bigger warm audience for the same ad spend.
SEEQ Supply wanted an answer to something most brands only guess at. Is professionally produced video actually worth investing in, or does the polish just look nice without doing more? So we didn't argue about it. We tested it. We ran our produced videos and SEEQ's creator content in the same Meta campaign, side by side, and let the numbers settle it.
“What really stood out was the quality of the creative. It’s a lot more polished and high quality than anything we currently have in the market.”
What We Tested
This was a top of funnel Meta campaign that ran from June 15 to July 14, 2026, with $13,069 in spend and 6 million impressions behind it. We built three produced concept families and cut each into multiple lengths, then ran them in the same ad sets as SEEQ's outside creator content. Same audience. Same objective. Same budget behind each. The cost to reach people came out identical, a $3.06 versus $3.05 cost per thousand, which is what made this a clean comparison instead of a guess. This does not include the third concept which hasn’t been deployed yet.
What We Found
The first surprise: both stopped the scroll equally well. Our videos and the creator content hooked almost exactly the same share of people in the first few seconds, about 18% each. If you only looked at that number, you'd think they were the same.
The difference showed up right after the hook. Once people started watching, they stayed with our videos far longer. More than three times as many people watched a quarter of the way through, and nearly four times as many made it halfway. Because people watched longer, each real view cost about a third of what it did with the creator content, at the exact same price to reach them.
All that extra watch time added up. Our videos sent roughly 72,000 people into SEEQ's warm audience, the group they can run follow up ads to later. That was 96% of all the audience growth the campaign produced.
UGC content is great at conversion. That's its job and it does it well. Produced video earns something different. It holds attention long enough to actually land the message. A few things drove that here:
Opening on the problem the product solves beat every other opening, in both concepts, independently. Shorter 15 second cuts held attention better than the 30 second versions, something we only caught because we shipped every concept in multiple lengths and let the data pick the winner. And the polish itself did real work. It kept people watching instead of swiping past.
A note on sales
Every tracked purchase in the account during the test came from our ads. We're reporting that for completeness, not claiming it as a sales result. This was a top of funnel campaign built to earn attention and grow the audience, and that's what we measured it on. The honest story here is attention and efficiency, not revenue.
The Work
The Takeaway
Same audience. Same budget. Same price to reach people. The only thing we changed was the creative, and people watched more than three times longer. Put another way, a brand trying to match this much watch time with creator content alone would need roughly three times the ad budget to get there.
That's the case for produced video. Not that it looks better, though it does. That it makes the same ad dollar work harder.
Methodology: All rates were calculated from raw counts across four ad-level Meta exports, compared within the same auction, same ad sets, same reach objective, over a 30 day window. Retargeting audience additions are estimated from unique 3 second viewers from cold ad sets. Purchase volume is reported for completeness and not claimed as a conversion result.
