I’ve been running online dating ads for a while, and honestly, it’s been more trial and error than I expected. When I first got into it, I figured traffic was traffic. If you put your ads in front of people, someone will click, right? Turns out it’s not that simple. Some sources just drain your budget with clicks that never turn into signups, while others surprise you with better conversion even with fewer impressions.
At the beginning, I stuck to the obvious: Google and Facebook. They’re the big names, and it felt safe. The issue was that “safe” also meant competitive and expensive. Dating is a crowded niche, and my ads were fighting for attention against huge budgets. On Facebook especially, I’d get likes or comments, but very few actual conversions. It felt like people were curious but not serious. With Google, the intent was better, but the cost per click was so high that I sometimes questioned if it was worth it.
I remember thinking: maybe the problem wasn’t my ad copy but where I was putting the ads. That’s when I started exploring other traffic sources. Some worked better than I expected, and some were a waste. Here’s a quick breakdown of what I noticed.
1. Native ads
I didn’t think much of them at first. They blend into articles or content feeds, and I figured people would just scroll past. But surprisingly, they got decent engagement. The traffic wasn’t massive, but the conversions felt more “real.” I think it worked because people weren’t in “ad mode.” They were reading or browsing, then they saw something that caught their attention naturally.
2. Push notifications
This one was hit or miss. On some networks, push ads felt spammy. But when I tested them on certain dating-focused traffic sources, I noticed higher CTRs. The challenge was that while people clicked a lot, the drop-off after the landing page was also high. Still, when the targeting was done right, push ads brought in some solid leads.
3. Adult networks
I hesitated here at first because I wasn’t sure if it would cross into being too aggressive. But the reality is that a lot of online dating users are active on adult traffic platforms. Once I tested carefully, I found that certain placements converted way better than mainstream ads. It’s not for every type of dating campaign, but if your offer lines up, it can work.
4. Niche social platforms
This one surprised me the most. Smaller platforms don’t have the scale of Facebook or Google, but sometimes the quality of clicks is better. For example, I tested ads on a smaller social app, and while I got fewer clicks overall, the conversion rate was almost double what I saw on bigger platforms.
One thing I had to accept was that not every traffic source is going to work for everyone. What’s effective depends on the type of dating offer, the audience, and even the region. A traffic source that works great in the US might flop in Europe or Asia. Testing really is the only way to figure out where the sweet spot is.
Another learning: don’t assume the biggest traffic source is always the best. When I chased volume, I ended up with wasted spend. But when I looked for sources where users were genuinely interested, even if the numbers were smaller, the ROI felt way healthier.
I came across a guide recently that sums this up pretty well. It lists out what traffic sources are worth trying and why some convert better than others. If you’re curious, here’s the link: Proven Traffic Sources for Online Dating Ads.
At the end of the day, I think the key is being open to experimenting beyond the “default” platforms. The more you test, the more you learn which sources actually bring in people who want what you’re offering. And honestly, that’s the only way I’ve been able to make my ads sustainable without feeling like I’m burning money.
Curious if anyone else has had similar results with native or push ads? Or maybe you’ve found a traffic source that consistently outperforms the usual suspects? I’d love to hear what’s been working for others.
At the beginning, I stuck to the obvious: Google and Facebook. They’re the big names, and it felt safe. The issue was that “safe” also meant competitive and expensive. Dating is a crowded niche, and my ads were fighting for attention against huge budgets. On Facebook especially, I’d get likes or comments, but very few actual conversions. It felt like people were curious but not serious. With Google, the intent was better, but the cost per click was so high that I sometimes questioned if it was worth it.
I remember thinking: maybe the problem wasn’t my ad copy but where I was putting the ads. That’s when I started exploring other traffic sources. Some worked better than I expected, and some were a waste. Here’s a quick breakdown of what I noticed.
1. Native ads
I didn’t think much of them at first. They blend into articles or content feeds, and I figured people would just scroll past. But surprisingly, they got decent engagement. The traffic wasn’t massive, but the conversions felt more “real.” I think it worked because people weren’t in “ad mode.” They were reading or browsing, then they saw something that caught their attention naturally.
2. Push notifications
This one was hit or miss. On some networks, push ads felt spammy. But when I tested them on certain dating-focused traffic sources, I noticed higher CTRs. The challenge was that while people clicked a lot, the drop-off after the landing page was also high. Still, when the targeting was done right, push ads brought in some solid leads.
3. Adult networks
I hesitated here at first because I wasn’t sure if it would cross into being too aggressive. But the reality is that a lot of online dating users are active on adult traffic platforms. Once I tested carefully, I found that certain placements converted way better than mainstream ads. It’s not for every type of dating campaign, but if your offer lines up, it can work.
4. Niche social platforms
This one surprised me the most. Smaller platforms don’t have the scale of Facebook or Google, but sometimes the quality of clicks is better. For example, I tested ads on a smaller social app, and while I got fewer clicks overall, the conversion rate was almost double what I saw on bigger platforms.
One thing I had to accept was that not every traffic source is going to work for everyone. What’s effective depends on the type of dating offer, the audience, and even the region. A traffic source that works great in the US might flop in Europe or Asia. Testing really is the only way to figure out where the sweet spot is.
Another learning: don’t assume the biggest traffic source is always the best. When I chased volume, I ended up with wasted spend. But when I looked for sources where users were genuinely interested, even if the numbers were smaller, the ROI felt way healthier.
I came across a guide recently that sums this up pretty well. It lists out what traffic sources are worth trying and why some convert better than others. If you’re curious, here’s the link: Proven Traffic Sources for Online Dating Ads.
At the end of the day, I think the key is being open to experimenting beyond the “default” platforms. The more you test, the more you learn which sources actually bring in people who want what you’re offering. And honestly, that’s the only way I’ve been able to make my ads sustainable without feeling like I’m burning money.
Curious if anyone else has had similar results with native or push ads? Or maybe you’ve found a traffic source that consistently outperforms the usual suspects? I’d love to hear what’s been working for others.