Contractor Dynamics
Contractors including HVAC, with a named Meta programme combining consulting and execution.
21.4 of 100 on disclosed practice. Read 12 September 2026, restated quarterly.
Our first sweep recorded this company as running no ads at all. That was wrong, and the reason is written up on the Ad Library check page, because it is the clearest illustration of why that check needs a control.
10 ads running under their own Page. Newest most from 30 Jun.
A count for one date. How we checked.
| Criterion | Score | What the published evidence shows |
|---|---|---|
| Causal measurement | 5 / 25 | Their case study quotes pipeline value alongside a return figure, which is closer to disclosure than a bare multiple, but no attribution window is stated and no measurement method is described. |
| Conversions API and event quality | 4 / 20 | Nothing documented flowing back to Meta. |
| Objective coverage | 5.4 / 18 | A brand-plus-lead position stated deliberately, which is a real strategic view. Objectives are not named individually. |
| Creative iteration | 7 / 15 | The largest active set here: ten ads running, eight launched on one day in June, newest in early September. Documented cadence is thin, so the score comes mostly from what the Ad Library shows. |
| Spend band, published | 0 / 12 | No commercial terms published. |
| Claim hygiene | 0 / 10 | The published return figure carries no window, no denominator and no date range. |
Source: contractordynamics.com, Meta ads programme page and case studies. Band definitions on the method page.
What they are strongest on
They actually run ads, more than anyone else listed, and they take a position on brand rather than treating Meta as a lead faucet.
Where they are weakest
A precise-looking return figure with nothing behind it that a reader can check.
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 |
|---|---|
| A case study quoting pipeline value and "6.03x return on their total ad spend" | Their figure. No attribution window, no denominator, no date range, so it cannot be compared against anything. |
Quoted word for word from Contractor Dynamics's own published pages, read 14 September 2026: Terms of service.
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 | Not published |
| 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 | We do not offer refunds on digital products or consulting programs once access has been granted. For done-for-you services, refund terms will be outlined in your individual service agreement. |
| Who owns the ad account | Not published |
Read from contractordynamics.com, Meta ads programme page and case studies on 12 September 2026, against published criteria. Page changed since? The corrections page gets it re-read.
- 20 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.
- 16 points sitting unclaimed on conversions api and event quality. Document server-side events, and whether booked jobs go back to Meta rather than only into your client’s CRM.