Vendor reportMotion, 2026
Text-only assets took nearly twice their share of Meta budget, while high-production assets got less than their share
Creatives
| Asset type | Share of creatives (%) | Share of spend (%) | Spend use ratio (spend share ÷ creative share) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Text only | 2.57% | 5.07% | 1.97 |
| Product image with text | 12.35% | 15.2% | 1.23 |
| Illustration | 3.68% | 3.93% | 1.07 |
| UGC | 26.01% | 26.03% | 1 |
| Lifestyle - product image with text | 8.88% | 8.82% | 0.99 |
| Lifestyle image with text | 24.82% | 23.5% | 0.95 |
| UGC mashup | 2.14% | 1.92% | 0.9 |
| Hybrid | 5.96% | 4.78% | 0.8 |
| Product image | 0.1% | 0.08% | 0.8 |
| High production | 6.58% | 5.22% | 0.79 |
Asset types: spend use ratio (share of spend ÷ share of ads)
- Reader Note:
- Spend use ratio = share of spend divided by share of creatives.
- Evidence:
- Observed behaviour
- Vendor interest:
- High — This comes from a company with a commercial interest in this market, so it is not a neutral source.
- Sample:
- An anonymized dataset of 550,000+ Facebook and Instagram ads from 6,000+ advertisers, representing about $1.3 billion in spend.
Good for
Comparing yourself against a similar segment, and choosing what to test next.
Not for
- Saying that one thing caused another, or predicting what you would get.
- This comes from a company with a commercial interest in this market, so it is not a neutral source.
- This is an aggregated or average number that covers very different cases. Real results in a particular segment may differ.
- The two groups were not split at random — they picked their own side. The difference may have been there before anything was measured.
- The source says how much it looked at, but not how any of it was chosen.




