Does tracking user behaviour really help matchmaking ads?
-
I’ve been working on a few matchmaking ad campaigns lately, and one thing that keeps coming up in discussions is user behaviour tracking. Some people swear by it, saying it’s the secret sauce to improving ad performance. Others find it a bit creepy or unnecessary. Honestly, I was in the middle — I didn’t fully get how much of a difference it could make until I tried it myself.
At first, I thought running matchmaking ad campaigns was mostly about the creative — the photos, the emotional hooks, the taglines about finding “your perfect match”. But after a few underwhelming campaigns, I realised maybe it wasn’t about what I thought people wanted to see, but what they were actually doing online.
That’s where behaviour tracking came in.
The problem: Shooting in the dark
I used to set up ads based on standard demographics — age, location, relationship status, and interests. It worked okay, but the engagement was inconsistent. One week, the click-through rates would be decent; the next, they’d drop with no clear reason.
The hardest part was figuring out why. Were people ignoring the ad because of timing? Did they find it irrelevant? Were they seeing it too often? I had no clue. It felt like throwing darts blindfolded — sometimes I’d hit, but mostly I just wasted budget.
A friend in digital marketing mentioned that I should start tracking not just who was clicking, but how they were behaving before and after seeing the ad. I thought it sounded like overkill. But curiosity got the better of me.
What I learned from tracking user behaviour
Once I set up some basic tracking tools, I began noticing patterns I hadn’t seen before. For instance, users who spent more time reading bios on dating sites tended to respond better to detailed, story-driven ads rather than flashy, image-heavy ones.
Then there were those who bounced off the site quickly — they preferred snappier, bold creatives with clear CTAs like “Find matches now” or “See profiles near you”. That insight alone changed how I designed my campaigns.
I also learned that time of engagement mattered more than I expected. The same ad performed way better at 9 p.m. than at 3 p.m., simply because that’s when people were actually in “dating mode” — scrolling through apps, chatting, or updating their profiles.
And it wasn’t just about what people clicked on, but how often and how deeply. Users who viewed multiple pages or liked several profiles were more likely to convert when retargeted with personalised ads — for example, ones referencing compatibility or “matches like the ones you liked”.
All of this came from tracking small behaviour details — clicks, scrolls, time spent on pages, repeat visits, and engagement with specific elements. It completely shifted how I looked at ad success.
Why behaviour data feels more “human” than it sounds
I used to think tracking was just a cold, technical thing — data points and analytics dashboards. But it’s actually the opposite when used properly. It helps you understand your audience in a more human way.
Instead of guessing what singles want, you start to see their real actions. You realise not everyone is looking for the same thing. Some are serious about finding a partner; others are just exploring. Some respond to subtle storytelling; others need quick gratification.
When I started paying attention to that, my ads stopped feeling generic. I could tailor messages that matched their intent. That’s when the conversion rates improved — not because I changed the product, but because I respected how people were actually behaving online.
If you’re curious to see why user behaviour tracking is important matchmaking ads, that article goes into more detail about how these insights help fine-tune ad campaigns without crossing privacy lines.
The small tweaks that made a big difference
Here are a few things I noticed after applying behaviour-based insights:
-
Custom audiences work better than broad targeting. Once I grouped users by how they interacted (not just who they were), the ad relevance score went up.
-
Dynamic creatives beat static ones. Ads that changed based on user behaviour — like showing a testimonial to those who viewed bios — performed 30% better.
-
Retargeting got smarter. Instead of hitting everyone who visited the site, I focused on those who engaged meaningfully. The cost per lead dropped significantly.
It’s funny — I used to think data made ads feel robotic, but it actually made them more personal.
Final thoughts
If you’re running matchmaking ad campaigns and still relying only on broad demographic data, you might be missing out on a big opportunity. Tracking user behaviour doesn’t mean invading privacy; it’s about observing how people naturally interact and learning from that.
For me, it turned out to be the missing link between decent campaigns and truly effective ones. Once you understand what people actually do — not just what they say they want — you can create ads that genuinely connect.
I wouldn’t say it’s a magic trick, but it’s definitely one of those quiet, behind-the-scenes tactics that make everything else work better.
-