How much time should I budget?

About 3 hours total, a working session and a review call. We do the heavy lifting.

What if I only want the roadmap, not the build?

That's the Campaign Repositioning Sprint. Ship it yourself, or upgrade to Done-For-You later.

Do you interview my customers?

Optional. We can mine your call recordings, reviews, and won/lost notes instead.

B2B teams spending $20K+/mo on ads whose demos aren't converting.

Book a 30-minute call. We'll tell you straight if it's a fit.

Where Endor Labs's ads lose the buyer

Endor Labs is running 11 live ads on LinkedIn and Google. Their average fit to their own ideal buyer is 7.1 out of 10, and 2 ads need fixing. Each ad below is one of Endor Labs’s real live creatives, read straight from the ad libraries.

Endor Labs’s live ads, scored against their buyer

79.6% of orgs are reassessing AppSec tools because of frontier AI (IDC). Get the, scored 7/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. IDC stat and build-vs-buy cost data make the asset feel worth downloading, but no preview of what the framework actually contains.
Customers report 83% fewer blocked PRs and 10x fewer security tickets. The playb, scored 8/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Concrete customer metrics and agentic framing nail the ICP pain, but the playbook contents are not previewed beyond the headline promise.
Live webinar Nov 12. A walkthrough of the maturity model for applying AI to appl, scored 8/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Specific topic, concrete draw, and clear logistics make this a strong event ad, though no named speaker reduces the pull slightly.
85% of developers already use AI coding tools at work (Stack Overflow). The play, scored 7/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Sharp role call and stat hook, but asset contents stay vague beyond the ADLC framing.
Live Nov 12. We map what to build in-house and what to buy, using cost and accur, scored 7/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Punchy question hook and clear draw, but body copy teases four models without naming any.
Only 10% of AI-generated code is both functionally correct and secure (Columbia , scored 6/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Right buyer and topic named, but zero preview of what is inside the playbook.
Four levels of AI maturity across two tracks. Secure, the code your developers' , scored 7/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Precise role targeting and four-level framework signal real structure, but no teaser finding to prove the asset earns the download.
The playbook includes a five-question build-or-buy test you can run against any , scored 7/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Concrete decision-framework hook resonates with CISOs weighing roadmap spend, but no data preview to validate the five-question test.
Live Nov 12. Security designed into the lifecycle behaves differently from secur, scored 7/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Strong POV headline lands a real position, but four models are named without any specifics to justify attending live.
From secure code generation to coordinated security agents, see what each stage , scored 8/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Unusually specific value prop, price-per-stage and build-or-buy framing gives CTOs a concrete reason to download.
Live Nov 12. Four levels teams build AI security, from secure coding to their ow, scored 6/10 against Endor Labs’s ideal buyer. Relevant topic and logistics are clear, but the framework promise is generic and no speaker or concrete agenda raises the draw.

See Endor Labs’s full live-ad board on AdRoast. Every creative scored against their ICP, with the exact fix for each.

Learn the method behind these scores: the AdRoast guides cover how to audit your ads against your ICP and why clicks do not turn into pipeline.