Clicks Geek
Local service businesses across several verticals, HVAC among them. US, established 2015.
84.0 of 100 on disclosed practice. Read 12 September 2026, restated quarterly.
1 ad running under their own Page. Newest from 29 May.
A count for one date. How we checked.
| Criterion | Score | What the published evidence shows |
|---|---|---|
| Causal measurement | 19 / 25 | Optimises toward booking completions rather than form fills, which is materially stronger than most of the field. Events still fire from their own stack, so the reading stays platform-attributed. |
| Conversions API and event quality | 19 / 20 | The densest Conversions API documentation in the set, in four places on one page, tied to the browser signal loss it exists to solve, including offline and server-side event quality notes. |
| Objective coverage | 15 / 18 | Instant forms and landing pages both named with a rationale for choosing between them, plus multi-step retargeting and lookalikes. Calls appear as a tracked conversion rather than as a bought objective. |
| Creative iteration | 12 / 15 | A documented testing structure with a stated refresh expectation. One ad found running from late May, so the Ad Library half is present but thin. |
| Spend band, published | 10 / 12 | Published client spend context on the service surface, including a named monthly figure, enough to place them in the upper published-spend band without a formal minimum-ad-spend schedule. |
| Claim hygiene | 9 / 10 | Client figure reading "$19K/mo, 68+ leads", attributed to a named client with a video review. Stronger provenance than most here; the figure is still ambiguous between ad spend and revenue. |
Source: clicksgeek.com, Facebook ads management service page. Band definitions on the method page.
What they are strongest on
Conversions API and booking-completion optimisation, documented in more depth than anyone else here.
Where they are weakest
Commercial terms are thinner than the leader’s, and the headline client figure still blurs spend and revenue.
Recorded as their claims, with what each one is missing. Nothing here is restated by us as fact.
| What they publish | What it does not say |
|---|---|
| States Meta Business Partner status | Unverified. Meta’s partner directory requires a login. No weight in the score. |
| Client review reading "$19K/mo, 68+ leads" | Their client’s figure. Ambiguous between spend and revenue, with no window or date range. |
Quoted word for word from Clicks Geek's own published pages, read 14 September 2026: Facebook ads service page.
Minimum terms, charges for leaving early and clauses about missed payments are common in agency contracts, especially where the agency pays for work upfront, such as building a website. The same eight fields appear on every profile. "Not published" means nothing the agency publishes addresses that point; a website's terms of use, which cover browsing the site rather than hiring the agency, don't count. None of this affects the score.
| Term | What they publish |
|---|---|
| Minimum term | We earn your business with results, not paperwork. |
| Cancelling after that | Not published |
| Leaving early | Not published |
| If a payment is missed | Not published |
| Price changes | Not published |
| Charges after you leave | Not published |
| Refund or guarantee | Not published |
| Who owns the ad account | Your ad accounts, your data |
Read from clicksgeek.com, Facebook ads management service page on 12 September 2026, against published criteria. Page changed since? The corrections page gets it re-read.
- 6 points sitting unclaimed on causal measurement. Publish the design of a holdout, geo test or lift study you have run, including what was randomised and over how long.
- 3 points sitting unclaimed on objective coverage. Name the campaign objectives you actually run, and say why you choose one over another.