CreativeYield

Analyzes AI-generated video ad variants against conversion data to rank creative attributes by ROAS impact, helping media buyers scale top-performing cuts. · Video Ad Optimization

DEAD SLOW · CAUTIOUS

5.8 ShipScore / 10

Scale and automation strongest; control weak — ad-platform APIs own the data lifeline.

Condition: Only build if you can prove attribute-level ROAS lift that Segwise/DAIVID/Triple Whale demonstrably cannot, on one channel first.

Part I — The Verdict what the instruments read

01 — The ShipScore breakdown

Control

C5 — needs Meta/TikTok ad API access; attribution data lives on platforms.

Entry barriers

E4 — Cometly stable not growing; DAIVID, Segwise, Triple Whale crowd the lane.

Need

N6 — Cometly's $204k proves category spend; creative-attribute angle barely differentiated vs Segwise.

Time-freedom

T7 — productized dashboard, but ad-account onboarding and attribution support stay hands-on.

Scale

S7 — global performance-marketing buyers, but buyer pool narrower than broad SMB SaaS.

What the five commandments measure

C — Control	Do you own the customer, or does a gatekeeper stand between you and revenue?
E — Entry	How hard is this to copy once it works? A rival's existence isn't the question — the durability of their advantage is.
N — Need	Is demand proven with money rather than vibes?
T — Time	Can income detach from your hours, or did you buy yourself a job?
S — Scale	How far does it reach without linear cost?

Scored on the evidence below, against CENTS as we've adapted it plus a Buffett-style moat reading of every rival — the same referee for every idea, including the ones we generate ourselves. The verdict follows the arithmetic: we never relabel a score to make it read better, and the weakest commandment is always named. The exact rubric stays in-house so the scale can't be written for.

02 — The pace test — $1M/yr

At $199/mo (assumed category price), you need 419 subscribers for a $1M/yr pace.

Nearest tracked rivals on that curve:

Cometly

$204k 100%

→ moat stableX · active

Dailyglowup: Maximize Looks

$13k 16%

→ moat stable

A rival's moat trend is its verified-revenue trajectory, not its rating — a 4.9★ incumbent with eroding revenue is a different opponent than a widening one. How it's computed →

Part II — The Evidence the receipts, good and bad

03 — Rival scan — corpus tracks 2 similar

Cometly	verified MRR $204k · CENTS 8.4 · revenue trend: stable · X-chatter: some (trustmrr)	→ moat stable X · active
Dailyglowup: Maximize Looks	verified MRR $13k · CENTS 5.8 · revenue trend: stable (trustmrr)	→ moat stable

Cometly — $204k verified MRR in attribution — owns the measurement layer your rankings depend on.
Segwise — Already ties hooks/scenes to ROAS plus ad generation — direct feature overlap.
Triple Whale — Entrenched ecommerce attribution suite bundling creative analytics; distribution and data advantage.

04 — Demand evidence

Cometly verified at $204k MRR, stable — real recurring spend on ad attribution analytics.
Dailyglowup at $13k MRR is adjacent-only; weak read-across to this idea.
X chatter shows repeated complaints that ROAS is misleading and creative performance hard to isolate — pain is real.
No Reddit signal and no funded companies tracked; demand for the specific creative-attribute wedge is unproven.

05 — Risks

Attribution accuracy is the product; iOS/privacy signal loss undermines every ranking you output.
Creative-attribute tagging is subjective — customers churn when recommendations don't replicate.
Incumbents (Triple Whale, Segwise) can ship this as a feature inside existing dashboards.
Small accounts lack conversion volume for statistically valid attribute rankings; TAM narrows to big spenders.

06 — Kill switches — what kills this with one decision

Meta Marketing API access tier / app review — Revoked or rate-limited access removes the ad and conversion data feed entirely.
Triple Whale or Cometly shipping native creative-attribute scoring — Bundled free into an installed suite, collapsing your standalone value.
Further platform privacy/signal restrictions — Conversion-level data thins until attribute-level ROAS attribution becomes statistically meaningless.

Part III — The Plan if you insist on proceeding

07 — What this scan can't tell you

Cannot tell whether your attribute-tagging model actually outperforms incumbents' existing scoring.
No data on media buyers' willingness to add another tool alongside Triple Whale.
Unknown minimum ad spend needed before attribute rankings become statistically reliable.

Scores judge the market and business model — not your ability to execute. Verified MRR = independently tracked revenue; reviews/upvotes = platform-reported. Judged 2026-09-24.

08 — The wedge & the next step

Own AI-generated variant testing end-to-end: score attributes, then auto-brief the next batch of cuts — closing the loop incumbents leave open.

Cheapest next step: Manually audit 3 agencies' last 60 days of video ads, hand-tag attributes, and show one ROAS insight they missed — charge for the audit.

Not quite it? Spin the model

Business-model variations of this idea, engineered to beat 5.8 — different vertical, audience, model, or wedge. Same harsh scale. Pro feature.

One evidence-backed gap a day, free

Close — but conditional. Every morning the engine files one mined gap, scored on the same harsh scale as this one. Free at 7am AEST, unedited.

Free forever · one email a day · unsubscribe in one click.

Monitor this idea

Weekly re-scan against the live corpus. If the market moves this ShipScore by a point, or flips the verdict, you hear about it. Free while we're small.