How to Think About Your CTV Budget

As part of our thought leadership series, we’re sharing perspectives from leaders across Strategus who shape how the company operates and grows.

This installment comes from Travis Fergason, our Programmatic and Sales Planner. He’s involved in planning nearly every campaign at Strategus, helping align investments with realistic modeling and measurable outcomes.

When I sit down with brands or agencies to plan CTV, the first thing that usually comes up is the monthly number.

“What can we do with $15K?”
“We’ve got $30K to test.”
“We’re reallocating $10K from linear.”

That’s completely fair. Budget matters.

But when the budget leads, the discussion quickly shifts into CPM comparisons, inventory negotiations, and allocations. Those are important details. But they’re downstream from the real question:

What are we trying to accomplish, and what does success actually look like?

Without a clearly defined definition of success, the budget inevitably becomes disconnected from the desired outcome. This unnecessary separation complicates the planning process. However, when success is cohesively understood, we can craft animpactful plan.

When Budget Becomes the Strategy

Where this becomes real is in the planning mechanics.

If the constraint is “we only have $X to spend,” the plan tends to default to spreading impressions as efficiently as possible. That usually means broad audiences, lighter frequency, and minimal share of voice.

On paper, that can look fine. In practice, it often limits what the campaign can realistically influence. Once we define the KPI first, the structure changes.

Now we’re asking:

• Do we need enough frequency to meaningfully impact post-view website visits?
  
  
• Are we trying to generate measurable foot traffic lift in a defined geo?
  
  
• Is the goal to demonstrate incremental revenue through an online purchases and revenue pixel?
  
  
• Are we focused on lifting brand awareness in a specific DMA?

Each of those requires a different weighting strategy, different geographic focus, and often a different investment threshold.

That’s where budget conversations become strategic. Because once you define what success actually looks like, you can model backwards into what it takes to achieve it.

What CPM Does (and Doesn’t) Tell You

There’s a tendency in CTV conversations to focus heavily on CPM. That makes sense. It’s a clean metric and easy to compare. But CPM is simply the cost of impressions. It doesn’t tell you whether those impressions are structured to influence an outcome.

From a sales planning perspective, the question isn’t “What’s the lowest CPM we can get?”
It’s “What kind of exposure is required to move this KPI?”

If those impressions aren’t delivered to the right audience, in the right geography, at the right frequency, they’re just impressions. They don’t move a KPI.

Frequency is also particularly important. There’s no universal “perfect” number. A regional HVAC provider and a national auto brand don’t need the same exposure cadence.

As a starting framework, we often look at frequency in the 7–10 range, then pressure-test that against market size, inventory availability, and campaign goals. If the frequency is too light, the message doesn’t stick. If it’s too heavy without purpose, you risk fatigue and wasted budget. The goal is calibrated exposure.

The point is simple: More impressions at a lower CPM does not automatically equal better performance. If that were true, everyone would shift their entire budget into the cheapest display ad inventory available.

That’s not how media works. Optimization is about aligning quality exposure with the KPI, not maximizing impressions.

What CTV Budget Levels Actually Deliver

This is where the planning discipline comes in.

From a sales planning perspective, we’re either:

1. Given a budget and asked to build within it, or
2. Asked to recommend what the budget should be.

In both cases, we evaluate whether that investment can realistically support the goal.

When we build a plan, we want to start with structure. Who are we trying to reach? In what geography? What role is CTV playing versus any supporting tactics? How much reach and frequency do we need to create a meaningful presence in the market?

Then we work backward from the budget required to hit those benchmarks.

If we’re handed a $5K national budget targeting broad homeowners, the reality is fairly straightforward. Spread across a national footprint, that level of investment is likely to produce a very low share of voice, limited frequency, and minimal ability to influence a KPI meaningfully.

At that point, we don’t just “run it anyway.” We adjust.

That could mean narrowing geographic reach, focusing on prioritizing audience segments, increasing investment, or rethinking how CTV fits within the overall mix.

We don’t automatically dismiss smaller budgets. The objective is to ensure the investment has a realistic chance of accomplishing what it’s meant to do.

That’s the responsibility of a planning partner, not just someone executing against a number.

Where Advertisers Lose Efficiency

In my experience, inefficiency usually shows up when budgets are spread too thin.

When CTV, online video (OLV), display, audio, and social are all activated at once, but none carry enough weight to build meaningful frequency or share of voice, the campaign struggles to create impact.

On paper, the mix can look diversified. In the market, the exposure often lacks the concentration needed to register.

CTV tends to perform best when it establishes a presence first. Supporting channels can then reinforce that exposure, capture intent, and drive downstream performance.

Pricing pressure can create a similar issue.

In competitive scenarios, it’s common to see blended CPMs that look very attractive. There’s nothing inherently wrong with lower-cost inventory. Display and online video play an important role in a full-funnel strategy, particularly in performance-focused layers.

The issue isn’t cost. It’s transparency and structure.

If a blended CPM drops materially below premium CTV benchmarks, it’s worth understanding how the inventory mix is constructed. Lower-funnel media is valuable. It’s often more conversion-oriented.

But those tactics tend to work best when supported by strong upper- and mid-funnel exposure.

When pricing comes in significantly below market, the right move is to ask clear questions. How much of the delivery is premium streaming? How much is OLV or display? Is the blended rate the result of intentional allocation, or a shift toward lower-cost environments?

Efficiency comes from investing enough in the placements that matter and using supporting tactics the right way, not from blending everything together to win a pricing comparison.

What Marketers Should Consider Before Locking in a Budget

Before committing to a monthly CTV investment, I usually encourage teams to slow down and pressure-test a few assumptions.

First, what role is CTV actually playing?
Is it driving mid-funnel consideration, reinforcing upper-funnel awareness, or serving as the primary video engine within a broader performance mix? The answer changes how the budget should be structured.

Next, what does a realistic share of voice look like in the target market?
A national campaign and a concentrated DMA strategy require very different levels of investment to achieve meaningful presence.

Frequency also deserves intentional modeling.
If exposure is too light, the message struggles to register. If it’s too aggressive without a clear purpose, spend efficiency erodes.

Measurement is another key variable. Are we evaluating website visits? Verified foot traffic? Online revenue through a purchase pixel?
Each framework carries different expectations for scale and timing.

Finally, how does CTV connect to the rest of the media mix?
In many cases, it works best when anchored in premium streaming environments and reinforced through supporting tactics that extend reach or capture lower-funnel intent.

CTV offers strong advantages compared to traditional linear such as:

• More precise audience targeting based on behavioral data
  
  
• Greater control and visibility into reach and frequency
  
  
• The ability to reinforce the message and exposure through cross-device retargeting
  
  
• Clearer attribution and reporting tied to measurable outcomes like website visits, foot traffic, or online revenue

But those capabilities only translate into results when the strategy, budget, and KPI are aligned from the beginning.

Planning discipline is what turns access into performance.

Build The Structure Before The Spend

Budget guidance and allocation discipline matter in today’s advertising environment.

CTV works best when the plan is built around a clear objective, realistic reach and frequency modeling, and measurement tied to a business outcome. Without that structure, dollars move quickly, but impact moves slowly.

When the goal is defined upfront, planning becomes more practical. You can see whether the investment supports a meaningful share of voice. You can determine whether the frequency will be strong enough to register. You can evaluate whether the reporting will actually answer the questions leadership cares about.

Every CTV budget tells a story about what a brand expects to achieve. The real work is making sure the numbers support that expectation.

If you’re evaluating your CTV investment and want a clear view of what it can realistically support, we’re happy to have that conversation. Reach out today →