ToolsSource: The Close
NAR's Meta Advantage+ test cut ad traffic costs 29%, but lead costs are still a mystery
Original headline: “NAR’s Meta Advantage+ Test Cut Traffic Costs 29% — But Did It Lower Lead Costs?” — The Close, Oct 6, 2026
The Close reports that NAR, working with Havas and Meta, tested Meta's automated Advantage+ Audience targeting inside its More Than Opening Doors consumer campaign; NAR says the test generated 432,000 landing page views at a 29% lower cost per view than its standard audience targeting, cut total campaign spend 25%, and won Meta's 2026 Agency Award for Best Use of Automation. NAR also reported a 9-percentage-point rise in consumers who said they intended to use a Realtor, a stated-intent survey metric. The Close notes NAR did not disclose cost per qualified lead, appointment, signed client or closing, nor enough about budget, duration or account scale to show whether an individual agent could expect similar results.
Our take (opinion & analysis, not reporting)
For agents running Facebook and Instagram ads: treat the 29% as a reason to test Advantage+ on your own account, not a promise of cheaper clients. Judge it by what lands in your CRM, meaning cost per qualified lead, appointment and signed agreement, which only works if your lead source tags and conversion tracking are set up before you launch. With Meta choosing more of the audience, the parts you still control matter more: the offer, the landing page and how fast you follow up.
Online discussion: no notable public discussion found yet (checked Oct 13, 2026).