The Challenge
Chandeliers and wall lights sell on appearance. Shoppers scroll a grid of thumbnails and decide from the image alone, long before reading a title or a price. That makes the category unusually easy to get clicks in — and unusually easy to waste money in, because a click costs the same whether or not the shopper's room, budget and ceiling height match the fixture.
Quick answer
A decorative lighting brand on Amazon India — wall lamps, chandeliers, pendant lights — produced ₹97.8 L of total revenue in 90 days at 6.3% TACoS and 5.17× ROAS, with 67.4% organic, from 16 active campaigns.
Its click-through rate was 1.29%, the highest of any account we manage and roughly three times what our apparel accounts see. Its conversion rate was 1.39%. That gap is the whole story of advertising a visual, high-consideration category.
The numbers
| Metric | Value |
|---|---|
| Total Amazon revenue | ₹97.8 L |
| Ad-attributed sales | ₹31.87 L |
| Ad spend | ₹6.16 L |
| ROAS | 5.17× |
| ACoS | 19.33% |
| TACoS | 6.3% |
| Organic share | 67.4% |
| Click-through rate | 1.29% |
| Conversion rate | 1.39% |
| Sponsored Display ROAS | 6.87× |
| Active campaigns | 16 |
Period: 4 June – 1 September 2026, settled through 31 August. Live account figures.
Why the name is withheld
Client name protected under NDA. All metrics from the live account.
Why CTR is high and conversion is low — and why that is normal
Lighting is bought with the eyes. A well-photographed chandelier earns the click from a thumbnail grid without the shopper reading anything, which is why CTR runs triple the site average.
But the same shopper then has to check ceiling height, room size, fitting type, bulb compatibility and whether the finish matches everything else in the room. Most of them will not buy, and there is nothing the advertising can do about it. A 1.39% conversion rate against a 1.29% CTR is the signature of a category where the image sells the click and the specification sells the product.
The failure mode is obvious once stated: an agency optimising for CTR in lighting will report excellent numbers while spending on shoppers whose rooms will never fit the fixture.
What we did
1. Bid on fit, not on beauty
Targeting is built around the qualifiers that predict a purchase — size, fitting type, room, style — rather than the generic head terms that generate the most clicks. Cheap clicks are abundant here; qualified ones are not.
2. Ran 16 campaigns, not 160
185 campaigns paused against 16 active. In a catalogue where a few hundred SKUs share the same handful of buying situations, more campaigns buy complexity rather than control. The account is small because it should be.
3. Used Sponsored Display for the return visit
Sponsored Display returned 6.87× against Sponsored Products’ 4.83%. Lighting purchases involve leaving, measuring something, and coming back — retargeting is materially cheaper than re-winning the first click.
4. Left Sponsored Brands switched off
One SB campaign, zero spend, zero impressions. It is not the right instrument for this catalogue at this stage, so it is not running. Reported here rather than quietly omitted.
Is a 1.29% CTR good?
For lighting and décor, it is normal-to-strong — and it is not a goal in itself. In this category CTR is the easiest metric to inflate and the least informative to optimise. The pair worth watching is TACoS against organic share: 6.3% and 67.4% respectively, on ₹97.8 L of quarterly revenue.
Free Amazon audit — we will run the same diagnostic on your account.
Result
1.29% click-through rate — the highest in our managed book and roughly triple the apparel accounts. ₹97.8 L total revenue at 6.3% TACoS, 67.4% organic, run on 16 active campaigns.
1.29%
Click-Through Rate
₹97.8 L
Total Amazon Revenue
5.17×
Blended ROAS
6.3%
TACoS
67.4%
Organic Share
16
Active Campaigns
90 days, Jun–Aug 2026
Period
Under NDA
Client Name