Anyone found the best strategy for matchmaking ads

I’ve been tinkering with matchmaking ads for a while, and honestly, it’s one of those areas where everyone seems to have an opinion, but very few agree on the same thing. The more I tested, the more I realized that there isn’t a magical, one-size-fits-all trick. Still, I kept noticing certain patterns, and that’s what got me curious enough to start this thread. Maybe some of you have been through the same trial-and-error loop.One thing I kept wondering in the early days was why some ads got lots of clicks but not a single paying lead. It used to bother me a lot because the numbers looked good at the top, yet nothing meaningful came out of it. I used to think something was wrong with the audience or maybe even the platform. But after a while, I realized the problem was usually hiding in much smaller details—like what the ad promised or how clear the next steps felt to the user.My main struggle, especially at the start, was figuring out what type of people I should really be targeting. With matchmaking ads, it’s easy to assume that anyone looking for love is a good fit. But that’s where I messed up. I had an audience that was way too broad, and the leads I got weren’t serious. They liked the idea of matchmaking, but not enough to pay for it. And if they aren’t ready to pay, the whole funnel gets shaky.So I started narrowing down my targeting—slowly, almost nervously. I tried focusing on people who had shown interest in premium dating options rather than general romance content. That alone made a noticeable difference. I wouldn’t say it fixed everything, but it cut down a lot of the “window shoppers.”Another mistake I used to make was focusing too much on the creative part and ignoring the message. I’d make pretty visuals and catchy lines, thinking that would pull people in. But it didn’t always translate to serious leads. What actually worked better for me was a more direct and honest tone—something closer to how real people talk on forums like this, not a polished ad script. When the ad sounded like a real service helping real people, the engagement felt more genuine.One small shift that helped a lot was making the call-to-action simpler. I used to say things like “Get Started” or “Find Your Match Now,” but all that did was make people think they were being pushed to sign up. When I changed it to something softer, like “See how it works,” the clicks were more intentional. It instantly filtered out people who weren’t ready to commit. The ones who did click were the ones curious enough to go a little deeper.At some point, I also experimented with sending traffic to a short explanation page instead of jumping straight into the sign-up form. I wasn’t sure if that would work, but it surprisingly made the leads warmer. It gave people a quick idea of what made the service different, and they stayed longer. That’s actually when I came across an article that talked about adjusting strategies based on how ready the audience is to take action. I found it helpful because it matched my real-life results. If anyone wants to check it out, here’s the link:
Best Strategy to Use in Matchmaking Ads I also played around with timing. I always assumed evenings were the best, since most people look for connection after work. But I noticed morning ads performed oddly well in terms of paid leads. Maybe people think more clearly in the morning, or maybe there’s less competition. Whatever the reason, it taught me that assumptions aren’t reliable in this space.Another thing I noticed was that people who clicked ads that mentioned “compatibility” or “personal guidance” turned into better-paying leads compared to ads that talked about general dating. Matchmaking attracts people who want something more curated, so highlighting that angle seemed to draw in the right kind of users.One approach I tested and didn’t find very effective was using too much emotional storytelling. It looked nice, and some people responded to it, but the leads weren’t serious. I think emotional ads are great for engagement but not always for getting paying customers. The ones who converted best were usually the ones responding to clear, realistic expectations and a simple path forward.If I had to sum up what worked for me, I’d say the “best strategy” is really a mix of narrowing the audience, sounding human, and reducing pressure. Nothing too fancy. Just plain, simple communication that respects the user’s pace. When I stopped trying to make the ad look clever and started making it feel honest, paying leads became more consistent.I’m still learning as I go, and I don’t think there’s a final, perfect formula. But these little changes added up for me. Would love to hear what others have noticed or tested in their campaigns too.