Overview
HubSpot closed-won deals + full lead universe, classified by verified attribution.
Revenue by Attribution Bucket
First-touch priority. Click a bar to filter the deals table.
Channels Within Each Bucket
Marketing-Originated deals classified by first-touch channel; Assisted by mid-journey touch.
The Tracking Gap
Remaining deals with no attribution after full-field audit.
These deals were audited against every attribution field in HubSpot — deal_source, hs_analytics_source (original + latest, drill-downs 1-2), hs_campaign, neoti_lead_source, plus contact-level leadsource, referral_source, conversion_source, how_did_you_hear_about_neoti_, first URL, first referrer, and conversion event names. No signal found on any of them. Most are legitimate sales-sourced deals (repeat customers, spec'd-in projects, inbound phone calls); some are true tracking gaps where reps created contacts manually without filling deal_source.
Recommended next steps: make deal_source a required field when creating any manual deal · route all inbound calls through a tracked number · tag all event badge scans with the event campaign · make how_did_you_hear_about_neoti_ required on the quote request form.
Headline Findings
The story marketing needs to tell tomorrow.
deals where HubSpot verified marketing sourced the lead. This is the number marketing can defend line-by-line.
deals where marketing didn't source the lead but a mid-journey event or campaign touch helped close it — mostly InfoComm/NAB follow-up sequences.
Brad Plant first-touched via Organic Search (Feb 2024), then converted through the InfoComm 2025 nurture email. Marketing owns both first and last touch — the clearest attribution story in the whole book.
5 ChatGPT + 1 Gemini — the first cohort of leads discovering Neoti through generative AI. Not yet in closed-won, but early pipeline signal worth optimizing for.
Closed-Won Deals
Click a row to see full attribution journey.
| Deal | Bucket | Channel | Amount | Close Date | Owner |
|---|
Lead Volume by Channel
3,341 leads created in 2026 YTD (lead universe is 2026 YTD only).
Leads by Month
Feb 2026 spike = one-time CAD bulk import (2,419 leads).
Signal-Bearing Leads
leads from digital / event / referral channels. Excludes bulk offline imports.
| Contact | Company | Channel | Created | Lifecycle | Self-Report |
|---|
Attribution Flow — Leads to Closed-Won
Signal-bearing leads (left) flow into the pipeline pool; closed-won deals (right) split by attribution bucket. Bulk offline lead imports excluded.
Winning Path Patterns
The repeatable plays behind marketing-influenced closes.
Search → Time +
Email Nurture → Closed-Won
neoti.com → Closed-Won
Contact → InfoComm/NAB
Campaign Touch → Closed-Won
Contact → Marketing
Email Sequence → Closed-Won
AI-Referral Leads — Early Signal
First cohort of leads finding Neoti through ChatGPT and Gemini. Not in closed-won yet, but a leading indicator of AI-search visibility.
What This Means
Generative AI is now a lead source. Six leads in the past 6 months came from ChatGPT or Gemini answering LED-display questions and citing Neoti. The pattern will accelerate.
Recommended action: Track AI-referral leads as a first-class channel. Optimize product pages, spec sheets, and market pages for AI retrieval. Add utm_source=ai tracking where possible. Ensure Neoti appears in AI answers for TAA-compliant, control-room, and broadcast LED display queries.
ROI by Channel
Every channel with either paid spend or attributed revenue. Channels marked “–” have no direct spend (organic, referral, or sales-driven).
| Channel | Spend | Attributed Revenue | Deals | ROI | Cost / Deal | Source |
|---|
Google Ads — Monthly Spend
Daily budget cut ~50% in Nov 2025. Clicks steady after cut — healthier CPC.
GA4 Traffic by Channel
Session share across all sources in the window. Direct + Organic dominate.
HubSpot Campaign Influence
Contacts touched by each named campaign in HubSpot. Not the same as attributed revenue — shows breadth of engagement.
| Campaign | Influenced Contacts | Sessions | Notes |
|---|
Headline Findings
Every $1 of tracked marketing spend returns about $36 of attributed closed-won revenue. Total tracked spend was $228,836 across Google Ads and trade shows; those channels sit under $8.29M of marketing-attributed revenue.
InfoComm is the highest-return single event: 8.5× ROI. $96K spend ($48K per show) against $813,744 in attributed revenue across 15 deals. Cost per deal ~$6,400.
NAB is expensive per deal but still profitable: 9.4× ROI. ~$80K on 4 attributed deals worth $748,640 — $20K per deal but the deals are large.
Google Ads: 9.5× ROI on $52,836 spend. Video Wall + TAA Control Room + Brand campaigns drove 5 closed-won deals worth $502,423. Brand campaign has the cheapest clicks; Video Wall converts best in Google’s own tracking (67.5 conversions).
Zero visibility on LinkedIn / social spend. No paid spend was tracked and organic session share is under 2%. Matt’s LinkedIn campaign has no UTMs, so nothing routes back to HubSpot.
Email nurture returns $495K on $0 direct spend — the HubSpot subscription cost is the real denominator here. Even if that’s $3K/mo x 18 = $54K, that’s still a 9× return.
Assumptions & Data Gaps
- Event costs provided by Josh — NAB $80K all-in, InfoComm $48K per show. Actual invoices would sharpen this further.
- LinkedIn / YouTube / X marked as $0 (organic-only per Josh). HubSpot Campaign spend fields are empty for all campaigns.
- HubSpot Marketing Hub subscription, agency fees, salaries, tools, and printing/collateral are not in the denominator. Full-loaded ROI would be lower.
- Referral, Repeat, and Sales-Sourced revenue is excluded from ROI — marketing didn’t drive it.
- Attribution logic (v4) is unchanged from the deal audit — same classifier used across the dashboard.