Investment Migration Performance Marketing
How we helped InvestMigrate validate a commission‑proven paid acquisition engine and connect marketing spend to capital raised.
Performance marketing tied to commissions and capital raised.
InvestMigrate is an investment migration advisory and distribution business that connects global investors to residency and migration programs through partner funds and operators. Their business model depends on qualified investor demand that converts into closed investments—so marketing must be measured against first‑party outcomes, not platform-reported conversions.
Neves Digital matched the requirement: media planning and buying + first‑party attribution, with a focus on outcomes that matter—commissions earned by InvestMigrate and capital raised.
Paid growth existed, but “what drives revenue” was unclear.
- Multiple pipelines and long sales cycles
- Marketing platforms reported conversions that didn’t match closed outcomes
- Leadership needed proof the MVP engine created real commercial value
Tie spend to commissions—and model capital raised.
- Media planning + buying with strict naming and clean funnels
- First‑party outcome layer: commissions as the “truth” metric
- Commission‑based ROAS to prove viability
- Connect paid acquisition to commissions and capital raised
MVP (Jul–Dec 2025): outcomes tied to commissions.
Notes: “Commissions” are commissions earned by InvestMigrate. “Money raised” is capital raised through InvestMigrate’s fund partner(s) during the MVP period.
| Scenario | Break‑even ad ROAS |
|---|---|
| A ($15k total / $11k ad) | 1.36x |
| B ($20k total / $16k ad) | 1.25x |
| C ($30k total / $26k ad) | 1.15x |
As spend increases under a leaner fixed‑cost model, required break‑even ROAS declines materially.
How the cases are modeled: Conservative, base, and upside are benchmarked directly from MVP results. Conservative anchors to the PGV benchmark (closest to the investment program). Base uses blended portfolio performance (PGV + EB‑3). Upside reflects the higher‑efficiency EB‑3 benchmark—used as an operational ceiling when process discipline improves.
| Scenario (6 months) | Case | Total spend | Forecast commissions | Implied investment sales | Forecast capital raised |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | Conservative | $90,000 | $251,460 | 3.14 | $2,514,600 |
| Base | $90,000 | $302,940 | 3.79 | $3,029,400 | |
| Upside | $90,000 | $371,580 | 4.64 | $3,715,800 | |
| B | Conservative | $120,000 | $365,760 | 4.57 | $3,657,600 |
| Base | $120,000 | $440,640 | 5.51 | $4,406,400 | |
| Upside | $120,000 | $540,480 | 6.76 | $5,404,800 | |
| C | Conservative | $180,000 | $594,360 | 7.43 | $5,943,600 |
| Base | $180,000 | $716,040 | 8.95 | $7,160,400 | |
| Upside | $180,000 | $878,280 | 10.98 | $8,782,800 |
Want this system for your business?
Every strategy starts with a conversation.