Library/beauty· US

Frøya Organics

Facebook · Instagram · Audience Network · Image

Active

All Frøya Organics ads & funnels →Meta Ad Library

Days running

340 days

Funnel score

54/100

Page speed

40/100

The ad

Most “luxury” skincare is 90% water 💦 That’s why it needs so many preservatives ❌ That’s why it does nothing for menopausal skin. I hit menopause and suddenly my skin didn’t respond to anything. Dry 😫 Dull 🥀 Thin. Overreactive. Then I found Frøya. 🧴 A tiny balm made in micro-batches, with wild Arctic herbs and no water. 🐝 It uses beeswax instead of chemicals to deliver nutrients deep into the skin. The result? No irritation 🙅‍♀️ No flare-ups 🚫 Just soft, healthy, respected skin 💕 It feels like skincare that finally understands what my skin is going through 🤍

Retinol thins your skin [Try the real fix]

Learn more

Angle: Problem-agitation-solution: luxury skincare fails menopausal skin; water-based formulas with preservatives don't work; water-free Arctic herb balm with beeswax is the answerHook: Contrarian claim + personal pain point (retinol thins skin; menopause skin crisis)Format: Image ad with emoji-rich body copy and testimonial-style narrative

View this ad in Meta Ad Library →

The funnel behind it

Offer: 46% OFF - Pick your biggest concerns & save extra

Visit landing page →

54/ 100

Funnel score

8-point CRO breakdown

How well the landing page behind the ad is built to convert, scored across 8 factors: offer, copy, speed, trust, mobile, message-match, CTA, and social proof.

This landing page uses a discount-first strategy that conflicts with the premium positioning in the ad. The page immediately asks users to select concerns to unlock 46% off, which shifts focus from product benefits to price incentives—potentially damaging brand perception for a 'luxury' product. The ad's compelling narrative about menopausal skin, Arctic herbs, and water-free formulation is absent from the page. Critical gaps include: zero social proof (testimonials/reviews), poor PageSpeed (40), no trust signals (certifications/transparency), and unclear value proposition beyond the discount. The concern-selection buttons are creative but add friction before conversion. The page would benefit from leading with product story, adding customer testimonials, improving speed, and repositioning the discount as secondary rather than primary.

What this funnel does right. Steal these.

Mobile experience: Layout appears responsive and touch-friendly. Button sizing is adequate for mobile interaction. Text is readable. No obvious mobile usability issues in visible sections.
Offer clarity: 46% off discount is clearly stated at top. However, the mechanism is unclear—users must select concerns to unlock the discount, which adds friction. The offer itself is prominent but the conditional nature reduces clarity.

Where it's weak

Social proof: No visible social proof elements on captured sections—no testimonials, reviews, ratings, user counts, or trust badges. This is a significant gap for a skincare product targeting menopausal women who typically rely on peer validation.
Page speed: PageSpeed score of 40 is poor. This significantly impacts user experience, especially on mobile. Slow load times increase bounce risk and reduce conversion likelihood.
Call to action: Primary CTA is selecting concern categories (buttons) rather than a traditional conversion action. Secondary option 'I want to pay full price' exists but is de-emphasized. CTAs are present but lack urgency and clear next-step direction.
Trust signals: Frøya branding is present but minimal trust signals visible. No certifications, ingredient transparency, company background, or third-party validation shown. For a premium skincare brand targeting mature skin, trust-building elements are insufficient.
Message match: Ad focuses on menopausal skin concerns, Arctic herbs, water-free formulation, and beeswax benefits. Landing page immediately pivots to discount offer and concern selection. The product story and differentiation from ad are deprioritized in favor of discount mechanics.

Full breakdown

Call to action5/10

Primary CTA is selecting concern categories (buttons) rather than a traditional conversion action. Secondary option 'I want to pay full price' exists but is de-emphasized. CTAs are present but lack urgency and clear next-step direction.

Page speed4/10

PageSpeed score of 40 is poor. This significantly impacts user experience, especially on mobile. Slow load times increase bounce risk and reduce conversion likelihood.

Trust signals5/10

Frøya branding is present but minimal trust signals visible. No certifications, ingredient transparency, company background, or third-party validation shown. For a premium skincare brand targeting mature skin, trust-building elements are insufficient.

Mobile experience8/10

Layout appears responsive and touch-friendly. Button sizing is adequate for mobile interaction. Text is readable. No obvious mobile usability issues in visible sections.

Headline6/10

Ad headline 'Retinol thins your skin [Try the real fix]' creates curiosity but doesn't appear on the landing page. Page headline 'WANT 46% OFF?' is transactional rather than benefit-driven. Mismatch between ad promise and page focus.

Social proof3/10

No visible social proof elements on captured sections—no testimonials, reviews, ratings, user counts, or trust badges. This is a significant gap for a skincare product targeting menopausal women who typically rely on peer validation.

Message match5/10

Ad focuses on menopausal skin concerns, Arctic herbs, water-free formulation, and beeswax benefits. Landing page immediately pivots to discount offer and concern selection. The product story and differentiation from ad are deprioritized in favor of discount mechanics.

Offer clarity7/10

46% off discount is clearly stated at top. However, the mechanism is unclear—users must select concerns to unlock the discount, which adds friction. The offer itself is prominent but the conditional nature reduces clarity.