Where HashiCorp's ads lose the buyer

HashiCorp is running 6 live ads on LinkedIn and Google. Their average fit to their own ideal buyer is 6.8 out of 10, and 2 ads need fixing. Each ad below is one of HashiCorp’s real live creatives, read straight from the ad libraries.

HashiCorp’s live ads, scored against their buyer

• Security doesn't stop at identity. It starts there., scored 6/10 against HashiCorp’s ideal buyer. Resonant security hook but no specifics on Vault, least-privilege secrets, or dynamic access to pull the ICP past the fold.
• The speed of AI is exposing the limits of traditional security., scored 6/10 against HashiCorp’s ideal buyer. Timely AI-risk framing lands for security engineers but stops short of any concrete runtime control or Vault-specific proof.
• When AI agents act, who's accountable?, scored 7/10 against HashiCorp’s ideal buyer. Audit and accountability angle hits regulated-enterprise security engineers squarely, though no named capability or outcome seals the click.
• Visibility without remediation doesn't reduce risk., scored 7/10 against HashiCorp’s ideal buyer. Sharp POV on a real security gap, but no proof or specificity to separate it from generic risk content.
• Finding exposed secrets is easy. Fixing them at scale is harder., scored 8/10 against HashiCorp’s ideal buyer. Secrets remediation at scale is a precise ICP pain, and the tension-framing earns the click.
• AI agents act in milliseconds. Risk accumulates just as fast., scored 7/10 against HashiCorp’s ideal buyer. Timely agentic-identity angle lands for security engineers but lacks any concrete outcome or proof.

See HashiCorp’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.