From a client’s perspective running CPE campaigns, CPA directly impacts overall campaign performance and CV volume.
Using [商人放浪記 – あきんどの成り上がり道] (A Tale of a Merchant) as a reference, the data below illustrates how performance changes when accessing local media directly with the same budget.
Contents
App Overview
[商人放浪記 – あきんどの成り上がり道] (A Tale of a Merchant) is a mobile simulation game. Players are required to complete daily tasks and use items to level up. This is a multi-point reward campaign in which users must reach level 37 within 30 days. Offering generous rewards makes the campaign even more appealing.
Campaign Overview
- Genre: Simulation
- Achievement Condition: Reach Level 37
- Deadline: Within 30 days
- Billing Model: CPE — Multi-point reward campaign where users receive the amount per completed tasks
Campaign Data (Average values based on user experience)
| Completion Days | Daily Workload | Difficulty | Enjoyment | User Reward Amount |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Avg. 24 days | 10–30 min/day | Easy | S | Moderate–High |
Estimated Performance at $7,000 USD Budget (iOS)
iOS
| CPE Campaign | Budget | Advertiser CPA | CV Count |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rocket A | $7,000 | $9.88 | 708 CV |
| Competitor A | $7,000 | $13.09 | 535 CV |
| Competitor B | $7,000 | $11.83 | 591 CV |
* Rocket A delivered 21.7% lower CPA and 23.0% more CVs vs. competitor average.
AOS
| CPE Campaign | Budget | Advertiser CPA | CV Count |
|---|---|---|---|
| Rocket A | $7,000 | $12.35 | 567 CV |
| Competitor A | $7,000 | $13.09 | 535 CV |
| Competitor B | $7,000 | $13.01 | 538 CV |
* Rocket A delivered 5.6% lower CPA and 5.8% more CVs vs. competitor average.
This week’s data reinforces a consistent pattern, though with an important twist: Rocket A’s advantage is far more pronounced on iOS than on AOS.
On iOS, Rocket A delivered a $9.88 CPA — 21.7% below the competitor average — while generating 708 CVs, 23.0% more than competitors. This isn’t a marginal edge; it’s a clear demonstration of doing more with less, both in cost efficiency and conversion volume.
On AOS, however, the gap narrows considerably. Rocket A’s CPA of $12.35 sits only 5.6% below the competitor average, with CV count just 5.8% higher. The direction of the result is the same — Rocket A still wins — but the magnitude tells a different story.
Why does the same campaign produce such different outcomes across platforms?
This is where CPA alone stops being a sufficient explanation. If cost efficiency were the only driver, we’d expect a similar gap on both iOS and AOS. Instead, the disparity points to something platform-specific: audience composition, engagement behavior, and how each local point site’s user base responds to CPE campaigns likely differ meaningfully between iOS and AOS environments.
Beyond CPA — Platform-Level Strategy Determines the Ceiling.
This week’s results suggest that optimizing media mix isn’t just about picking the cheapest CPA campaign — it’s about understanding where a platform’s strengths are best leveraged. Rocket A’s better performance on iOS, compared to its more modest lead on AOS, hints at deeper differences in reach and audience fit that pricing metrics alone can’t capture.
Rocket A’s continued access to Japan’s local media ecosystem gives advertisers the flexibility to calibrate platform-specific strategy — rather than assuming a single approach will perform equally well everywhere.
If you’re interested in running campaigns across Japan’s local media, visit the Rocket A website. You’ll find introductory materials, campaign references, and estimated simulation data tailored to your app.
