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 Strivacity's ads lose the buyer

Strivacity is running 24 live ads on LinkedIn and Google. Their average fit to their own ideal buyer is 7 out of 10, and 7 ads need fixing. Each ad below is one of Strivacity’s real live creatives, read straight from the ad libraries.

Strivacity’s live ads, scored against their buyer

Single-tenant by default, not an upsell, scored 8/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Creative copy sharpens the headline into a compliance differentiator that hits regulated-industry buyers hard.
Losing customers at sign in?, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Pain hook lands cleanly for retail buyers but the gated asset offer lacks urgency or a specific outcome promise.
Retail growth is decided at sign-in. Most retailers aren't looking there., scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Contrarian framing earns attention.
Your loyalty program is more exposed than your cart., scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Sharp vertical hook targets retail fraud pain directly, but the offer is a checklist, not a platform conversation.
Identity impacts cost, conversion, and fraud. Here is how to measure all three., scored 6/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Revenue angle is relevant but the creative and headline promise metrics without showing any, leaving the ICP buyer unconvinced.
Comparing CIAM vendors: Here's what to weigh, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Catches active Okta evaluators at the right moment with named competitors and concrete comparison criteria.
Analysts are recognizing new approaches to customer identity., scored 6/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Analyst recognition is credible proof but 'Notable Vendor' is a weak tier signal that undersells the win to skeptical buyers.
Strivacity is built with AI in mind., scored 8/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Directly names the ICP trigger of AI agent governance and draws a sharp contrast against Okta, Ping, and Auth0 by name.
Identity metrics that retail clients should track, scored 6/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Vertical targeting is on point but the mind map format and vague body copy do not give the buyer a reason to act now.
How does your sign-in experience stack up?, scored 6/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Interactive benchmark framing is engaging but 20 benchmarks with no named stakes or proof leaves the click motivation thin.
Here's the Okta vs. Auth0 vs. Ping vs. Strivacity breakdown, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Four-way named comparison on TCO and architecture is exactly what a late-stage CIAM evaluator needs, but no pain hook pulls them in cold.
Simplify customer identity management, scored 8/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Named competitors plus zero-disruption migration promise hits the exact legacy CIAM pain trigger.
Three Ways Off Legacy CIAM, scored 8/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Competitor names plus no-password-reset promise directly addresses the migration fear holding buyers back.
Customer Sign-In Identity AI Era, scored 6/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Comparison angle is relevant but 'AI Era' headline is vague and the body buries the differentiator.
Customer Identity and Access Management, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Strong sitelinks covering fraud, AI agents, and CIAM education serve multiple buyer intents well.
CIAM Okta vs Ping Comparison, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Competitor comparison headline captures high-intent evaluation queries but body copy stays generic.
Most Retailers Miss This CIAM, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Vertical-specific hook and 'login as growth lever' framing resonate with retail digital leaders.
Fraud Prevention for Retailers CIAM, scored 6/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Fraud angle fits retail ICP but the checklist offer is thin and the CIAM connection stays implicit.
Don't Lose Shoppers at Login, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Conversion-loss framing and free map asset are concrete, but the offer depth is light for an enterprise buyer.
AI Agent Consent Management Controls, scored 7/10 against Strivacity’s ideal buyer. Hits a sharp emerging pain point but 'Four Controls' is vague without naming them.

See Strivacity’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.