You're testing 50+ angles per week and blaming the algorithm when nothing scales. The real problem? Your hit rate is garbage. Here's what nobody tells you: Student A: Tests 70 creatives/week. Stuck at $20k/month. Hasn't found a winner in 2 months. Student B: Tests 10 concepts/week. Doing $10k days consistently. The difference isn't volume. It's hit rate. 100 creatives at 1% hit rate = 1 winner 20 creatives at 20% hit rate = 4 winners Most of you are Student A. Throwing shit at the wall hoping something sticks while your blended CAC climbs. What you actually need: Better creatives, not more creatives. The formula that matters Volume × Hit Rate = # of Winning Ads Low hit rate? Stop testing random angles. Focus on intent and belief-building first. High hit rate? Now you can push volume. Here's the trap. The more volume you push → less time per concept → lower hit rate. You can't scale both without a team. Brands like Ridge test thousands of creatives because they have massive teams hitting KPIs. Your solo creative strategist can't match that output. And if you can't make winners yourself, hiring more people just amplifies your failures at scale. My definition of a winner. Gets 30-40%+ of account spend at target KPIs. If an ad hits that, the account scales. Simple. Stop optimizing for creative count. Start optimizing for winner count. Fix your hit rate first. Then scale the team. Not the other way around.