This field record estimates how dependent Meta marketers are on a small number of creative assets, measured as the share of account spend captured by the highest-spending ad-name creatives. The short name used in the repository directory is the creative spend concentration study.

Across 41 Meta accounts from clients sampled of various industries in August 2026, the unweighted account-mean spend share is 16.8% on the single top ad-name creative, 34.4% on the top 3, and 59.7% on the top 10—leaving 40.3% on creatives ranked 11 and below. Spend-weighted means are slightly less concentrated (top 10 = 48.6%), indicating larger accounts diversify spend across more named creatives.

Sample

The asset set is dataset EMR-2026-09: ad-level spend and ad names for August 2026 from the same random sample of advertiser accounts as EMR-2026-07B (accounts that each spent at least $100,000 in June 2026). Clients sampled of various industries. The pool covers 8,184 ad insight rows collapsing to 4,942 normalized creatives (mean 329 named creatives per account). Creative media files were not downloaded.

Method

A creative is defined by normalized ad name within an account. Names that match exactly (case-insensitive) across campaigns or ad sets are treated as one creative. Names containing - copy (case-insensitive) are collapsed onto the non-copy base name. Spend is summed by that key; campaign and ad-set structure is ignored. For each account, creatives are ranked by spend and shares are computed for the top 1, top 3, top 10, and the remainder (creatives ranked 11+). Primary results average those shares equally across accounts; spend-weighted averages are reported as a secondary check.

Findings

On an equal-account basis, marketers in this sample put about one-sixth of spend on a single named creative and nearly three-fifths on their top ten. The long tail beyond the top ten still receives about two-fifths of spend on average, so dependence on a few winners is real but not absolute. Median account figures are close to the means (top 1 = 15.0%; top 10 = 56.7%).

Ten creatives, 3% of the catalog, draw 60% of spend

Average account, Meta, August 2026: share of named creatives vs. share of spend

#1 creative#2–3#4–1011th and beyondShare ofcreativesShare ofspend16.8%17.6%25.3%40.3%Creatives ranked 11th and beyond: 97%Top 10 creatives: 3% of an average account's 329,but 59.7% of its spendSpread across the other ~319

Source: Darwin IQ Labs, dataset EMR-2026-09 · Unweighted mean across accounts; creatives are normalized ad names · Clients sampled of various industries

Spend-weighted concentration is lower (top 10 = 48.6%; long tail = 51.4%), consistent with higher-spend accounts carrying more distinct named creatives into auction.

Bigger accounts spread spend across more creatives

Share of account spend by creative rank, equal-account mean vs. spend-weighted mean

#1 creative#2–3#4–1011th and beyondAverage account16.8%17.6%25.3%40.3%Weighted by spend15.1%13.7%19.8%51.4%Top 10: 59.7% → 48.6% once larger accounts count for more

Source: Darwin IQ Labs, dataset EMR-2026-09 · Meta, August 2026

What this record does not claim

  • No creative-level file, account list, brand identifiers, or raw ad names are released with EMR-2026-09.
  • Ad-name identity is a naming proxy, not a pixel-hash or asset-ID match; differently named duplicates of the same visual are not merged.
  • The comparison is an observational field contrast in live Meta accounts, reported as observed. It is not a causal estimate of creative risk or a recommendation to concentrate spend.