The July story in one line
Forus had a strong DTC month — 166K in net sales on 272 orders, with 153 new customers acquired at a blended CAC of 110 and an MER of 10.37x. The shape is healthy: 7,445 sessions converting at 2.81%, new customers making up 56% of orders, and Meta doing the heavy lifting on cold acquisition with the attribution model rewarding it (see the Meta tab). All figures are DTC only — wholesale/B2B orders are excluded (6 large B2B invoices, ~96K, sat outside the storefront and would otherwise distort revenue, AOV and MER). The watch-item is inventory and fulfilment keeping pace with acquisition.
Commercial
Net revenuei
166,252
DTC net sales
Ad spendi
16,754
10% of revenue
MERi
10.37x
total revenue ÷ ad spend
Blended CACi
110
ad spend ÷ new customers
Acquisition
New customersi
153
56% of orders
Repeat customersi
109
40% of orders
Repeat ratei
43.3%
of customers
LTV (30-day)i
683*
*provisional · window filling
Days between ordersi
~68*
*provisional
Traffic & conversioni
Traffic read — scaling without breaking
The shape is healthy: 7,445 sessions converting at 2.81% into 272 DTC orders, with new customers making up 56% of them. A 2.81% conversion rate on cold-heavy paid traffic says the acquisition is finding qualified people, not just volume — Meta is the engine doing most of the filling (see the Meta tab), with Google and email converting downstream. The watch-item isn't demand; it's making sure fulfilment, stock and support keep pace with the order count.
Revenue waterfalli
The gap between gross (278K) and net (166K) reflects Forus's discount and bundle structure on high-AOV products; net is the number that matters for the P&L. Wholesale/B2B invoices are excluded throughout — they sat outside the storefront and would distort these lines.
Platform vs Polar — attributioni
Google (Paid Search)
6,025 AED · 52 conv · CPA 116 · genuinely efficient
Conversion value
30,395
21,357
Reading the gap — July, the attribution inverts
This is the most important thing on the page, and it's the opposite of B. Health. For Forus, Meta's Full Impact ROAS (6.62x) is far higher than its platform ROAS (2.27x) — the cross-channel model credits Meta more than Meta claims for itself. That happens because Forus is an own-brand in acquisition mode: it has almost no repeat base for Meta to re-bill, so nearly everything Meta touches is a genuinely new customer, and Full Impact rewards that incrementality. It's the clean proof that the attribution model isn't biased against Meta — it discounts Meta at B. Health (where it re-bills loyal buyers) and rewards it here (where it actually acquires). Google is the reverse of its B. Health self too: platform 4.99x, genuinely efficient on a small 6K budget.
All channels — Polar attributioni
| Channel | Spend | Orders | New cust. | Gross rev | CPA | ROAS |
|---|
| Meta (Paid Social) | 10,729 | 90.2 | 61.0 | 67,539 | 176 | 6.30x |
| Klaviyo (Email/SMS) | — | 38.8 | 8.7 | 64,904 | — | — |
| Google (Paid Search) | 6,025 | 24.7 | 18.2 | 21,357 | 244 | 3.55x |
| Affiliate | — | 20.9 | 19.2 | 15,052 | — | — |
| Direct / Organic / Other | — | ~97 | ~46 | remainder | — | — |
Channel attribution read — July
Meta is the engine — on both revenue and acquisition. On a clean DTC basis, Facebook Ads is the largest linear gross-revenue block (67.5K) and the new-customer leader (61 new at a 176 CPA, 6.30x) — the cleanest acquisition line in the account. Klaviyo is the retention engine (64.9K, ~9 new) — monetising the base, not acquiring. Google adds 18 new at a healthy 3.55x on a small budget, and Affiliate quietly delivers 19 new customers at zero tracked media cost. The takeaway: Meta, Google and Affiliate are all underfed relative to how well they acquire; there's clear room to scale while the economics hold. (Klaviyo's linear revenue looks far smaller than a naive pull would show — that's because ~190K of what would appear here was wholesale/B2B credit, now correctly excluded.)
Top products by revenue — Julyi
| # | Product | Orders | AOV | Revenue | % of total |
|---|
| 1 | BPC Gold | 121 | 648 | 78,442 | 47.2% |
| 2 | Forus Protocol | 70 | 755 | 52,821 | 31.8% |
| 3 | REM+ | 100 | 350 | 34,989 | 21.0% |
| 4 | Hydration Bottle | 4 | — | accessory | — |
Three hero SKUs carry the whole DTC business — BPC Gold leads at 47%, with Forus Protocol (32%) and REM+ (21%) behind it, so there's no single-product fragility. These are DTC-only figures; the wholesale/B2B orders (which stocked up heavily on BPC Gold and REM+) are excluded. More on the mix and the scaling trajectory on the Growth & products tab.
July at a glance
166K DTC net · 272 orders · 153 new customers
MER 10.37x · CAC 110 · AOV 611Meta drove 41% of new customers
How July was built
July was an efficient acquisition month: 153 new customers at a blended CAC of 110, with new customers making up 56% of all orders. The economics are healthy — an MER of 10.37x means the business returns well above the 4x DTC benchmark. Meta did the heavy lifting on cold acquisition (41% of new customers), email compounded the base, and all three hero SKUs contributed. (These are DTC figures — the month also included ~96K of wholesale/B2B invoices, excluded here so the read reflects the actual storefront.) The question for August is how hard Meta, Google and Affiliate can be pushed before the economics turn, and whether stock and fulfilment keep pace.
Hero SKU performance — July
| Product | Role | Net rev | Orders | AOV | % of revenue |
|---|
| BPC Gold |
Flagship / acquisition |
78,442 lead |
121 |
648 |
47% |
| Forus Protocol |
Bundle / high-AOV |
52,821 |
70 |
755 |
32% |
| REM+ |
Sleep / repeat driver |
34,989 |
100 |
350 |
21% |
| Total (3 hero SKUs, DTC) | | 166,252 | 272* | 611 | 100% |
*Order count reflects total store orders; SKU orders overlap where customers buy more than one. The Hydration Bottle runs as a low-volume accessory/add-on, not a hero line.
Product read — a balanced three-legged stool
BPC Gold is the flagship at 47% of DTC revenue and a high 648 AOV — it's the product most new customers come in on. Forus Protocol (the bundle, highest AOV at 755) is the clear #2 at 32%, and REM+ (sleep, lower-priced at 350) drives volume — 100 orders — at 21% of revenue. This is a strong position: no single SKU is more than about half the business, so a stock-out or category headwind on any one product wouldn't sink the month. The natural growth motions are (1) using BPC Gold as the acquisition hook and cross-selling the Protocol and REM+ into the second order, and (2) making sure the high-AOV lines have inventory depth to absorb the Meta scaling. (Wholesale/B2B, which stocked heavily on BPC Gold and REM+, is excluded from these DTC figures.)
Funnel roles — how the channels work together
Top of funnel
Meta + Affiliate · create demand
Meta drove 61 new customers at 176 CPA / 6.30x; Affiliate added 19 more at no tracked cost. This is where the growth originates — cold audiences meeting the brand for the first time.
Mid funnel
Google · capture demand
Catches the intent Meta creates plus category search — 18 new customers at 3.59x on a small 6K budget. Efficient and underfed; room to scale.
Bottom of funnel
Klaviyo · compound demand
~70K in DTC attributed revenue — the repeat engine monetising the base. Campaigns and flows are roughly even (~39K / 31K) once the B2B order is stripped out; the retention flows are built but idle.
Blended
MER 10.37x · the scoreboard
When all four work together, the DTC business returns 10.37x on ad spend. That's the number that says the system is healthy — no single channel has to carry it.
What to watch into August
Scale Meta cold prospecting
6.62x Full Impact — push spend while economics hold
Lean in
Feed Google harder
4.99x on only 6K — clearly underfed
Lean in
Formalise Affiliate
19 new customers at no tracked cost
Grow
Inventory & fulfilment depth
Order count doubling — stock is the risk, not demand
Watch
Growth read — the constraint is operations, not demand
Every acquisition channel is either efficient-and-underfed (Meta, Google) or free-and-growing (Affiliate), so there's clear headroom to push spend and grow further. The binding constraint in a month like this is usually operational — inventory depth on the three hero SKUs, fulfilment speed, and support load as order volume doubles. The right posture for August is to scale Meta and Google spend deliberately while watching CAC and Full Impact ROAS for the first sign of diminishing returns, and to make sure stock can absorb it.
Mid funnel · July 2026
Google · Demand capture
Catches the intent Meta creates and the category search around Forus's products. Small budget, genuinely efficient — the opposite of B. Health's Google, which broke this month.
Spend6,025
Conversions52
CPA116
Platform ROAS5.04x
Google campaigns — July (platform)i
| Campaign | Type | Spend | Conv | ROAS | Read |
|---|
| pmax | bpc gold | PMax product | 1,840 | 8 | 2.94x | flagship, scaling |
| shopping | generic | Shopping | 978 | 4 | 3.23x | solid |
| pmax | rem+ | PMax product | 967 | 18 | 11.30x | ✓ star |
| non-brand | search | Search | 923 | 2 | 1.82x | test, weak |
| demand gen | Demand Gen | 476 | 1 | 1.64x | test, weak |
| brand | search | Brand | 459 | 13 | 11.04x | ✓ defend |
| shopping | brand | Shopping brand | 381 | 6 | 8.81x | ✓ efficient |
| Google total | | 6,025 | 52 | 5.04x | |
Google read — efficient and underfed
The account blends to 5.04x on just 6K of spend — genuinely efficient, and the mirror image of B. Health's Google (which collapsed to 1.79x this month). The efficient core is doing the work: PMax REM+ (11.30x), brand search (11.04x), shopping brand (8.81x) are all excellent. BPC Gold PMax is the biggest line and still scaling healthily at 2.94x. The two weak spots — non-brand search (1.82x) and demand gen (1.64x) — are small deliberate tests, not problems.
The clear opportunity is budget. When your blended ROAS is 5x and your best campaigns are above 10x, you're leaving growth on the table by under-spending. Google is a place to lean in — carefully, since demand capture depends on Meta continuing to create the demand, but the headroom is obvious.
Read this first — wholesale removed
One B2B order (Hady Amer / Blindspot Health, 89,550) was sitting inside Klaviyo's attribution for the "July - 01 - Six signs you're under-recovered" campaign and has been removed from every figure below (its real DTC revenue, 6,122, is kept). Polar's wholesale filter does not reach the Klaviyo table, so this was done manually. All Klaviyo numbers here are DTC-only, and now reconcile with the agency's report to the dirham (70,488).
What the month actually looks like
On a clean DTC basis, Klaviyo drove ~70.5K in attributed revenue — campaigns 39.4K and flows 31.0K, roughly even. That's a solid, healthy contribution (~42% of DTC net), not the blockbuster the raw number implied. Campaign revenue-per-send is a normal 3.92 AED once the B2B order is out (the raw 12.81 was that one invoice). The bigger story is the flows: the retention stack is built but barely firing — see below.
July headline — direct flow & campaign attribution (DTC)
Direct Klaviyo revenuei
70.5K
DTC · B2B order removed
Campaign revenuei
39.4K
DTC · ex-B2B
Flow revenuei
31.0K
automated
Campaign RPSi
3.92
AED per send · normal
New subscribersi
174
list growing with the brand
Flow vs Campaign split — July (DTC)
| Type | Sends | Revenue | RPS | Basis |
|---|
| Flows (automated) | 1,036 | 31,044 | 30.0 | wholesale-clean |
| Campaigns (broadcast) | 10,070 | 39,444 | 3.92 | DTC (−89,550 B2B) |
| Direct Klaviyo total (DTC) | 11,106 | 70,488 | 6.35 | ~42% of net |
Campaign performance — Julyi
| Campaign | Sent | Recip. | Open | Click | Revenue | Rev/recip |
|---|
| 01 · Six signs you're under-recovered | Jul 10 | 643 | 44.9% | 1.05% | 6,122 | 9.5 |
| 03 · 24 hours to go | Jul 14 | 697 | 48.7% | 0.00% | 4,695 | 6.7 |
| 04 · Protocol BIS | Jul 15 | 675 | 47.2% | 1.33% | 6,298 | 9.3 |
| 05 · Forus Philosophy / Protocol | Jul 17 | 676 | 47.6% | 0.92% | 6,098 | 9.0 |
| 06 · REM+ Education | Jul 21 | 668 | 46.2% | 0.69% | 4,544 | 6.8 |
| 07 · Rate your recovery | Jul 23 | 676 | 46.9% | 0.28% | 8,709 | 12.9 |
| 02 · Recovery Stories — Loui Blake | Jul 30 | 642 | 43.7% | 0.55% | 2,978 | 4.6 |
| DTC total (Hady Amer order removed) | | ~4,677 | 46.4% avg | ~0.7% avg | 39,444 | — |
July-01 originally showed 95,672 — that included one B2B order (Hady Amer / Blindspot Health, 89,550) which has been removed, leaving its real DTC revenue of 6,122 (~11 orders at 557 AOV). Recipient counts overlap across sends (one list).
Campaign read — great opens, soft clicks
Deliverability and opens are genuinely strong — every send landed 44–49% opens (the agency's 46% average holds up), which says the list is engaged and the subject lines work. The weak point is clicks and downstream revenue. Click rates sit at 0.3–1.3%, and two sends stand out at the bottom: "24 hours to go" got a 0.00% click rate, and "Recovery Stories" managed just 4.6 per recipient. The best performer was "Rate your recovery" (12.9 per recipient, 8.7K) — a review/re-engagement angle — followed by the two Protocol education sends and the opening "Six signs" email (~9–9.5 each, once its wholesale order is stripped out). The pattern: people open, but the content isn't consistently earning the click-through to purchase. The opportunity is stronger CTAs and tighter product links in the body, and leaning into the review/recovery angles that are clearly resonating.
Flow-by-flow — the retention layeri
| Flow | Trigger | Revenue | Orders | RPS | Read |
|---|
| Welcome Series (15%) | Signup | 19,916 | 31 | 40.6 | discount pull-forward |
| Abandoned Cart | Added to cart | 5,491 | 5 | 25.3 | rescue |
| Browse Abandonment | Viewed product | 5,150 | 5 | 34.8 | rescue |
| Post Purchase | Placed order | 488 | 1 | 2.7 | barely firing |
| Product Review | Fulfilled order | 0 | 0 | — | ✗ live, 0 rev |
| Customer Winback | Placed order | 0 | 0 | — | ✗ live, 0 rev |
| Subscription Upsell | Placed order | 0 | 0 | — | ✗ live, 0 rev |
| Subscription Retention | Loop upcoming order | 0 | 0 | — | ✗ live, 0 rev |
| Total flows | | 31,044 | 42 | 30.0 | |
Flow read — the retention engine is built but idle
98% of flow revenue comes from three flows that either hand out the signup discount or rescue a purchase already in motion (Welcome, Abandoned Cart, Browse Abandonment). The flows that actually build a repeat business — Post-Purchase, Product Review, Customer Winback, Subscription Upsell, Subscription Retention — are all live but producing essentially zero. They exist; they're not firing.
For a brand acquiring 150+ new customers a month on consumable products (BPC Gold, REM+), that idle retention layer is the single biggest email opportunity in the account. The question for the agency isn't "build more flows" — it's why are the five reorder/retention flows that are already live returning nothing? Wrong triggers, empty audiences, or a subscription integration not wired up are the usual causes.