Marketing Benchmarks and Strategy for CMOs in 2023

6 min read

⏱ 7 min read

Analysis & Revision Plan

Issues Identified

1. Em dashes present in several places; these have been converted to semicolons or separate sentences.
2. Unsupported or absolute claims have been softened with qualifiers or generalized statements.
3. Sentence openers were varied to reduce repetition.
4. Vague language has been replaced with clearer descriptions or action prompts.
5. Final advisory sections were tightened to focus on concrete takeaways.
6. Redundant material was trimmed to improve concision.

Marketing Benchmarks for 2023: Where CMOs Should Actually Calibrate

Many CMOs entering 2023 planning cycles used the prior year’s internal performance data as their primary benchmark. That approach is reasonable in stable markets; in markets that have structurally shifted, it can compound blind spots. Changes in platform tracking after iOS 14 continued to affect paid social performance through 2023. AI and automation have influenced channel mix at a pace planning cycles have struggled to match. CFOs who tolerated growth-at-all-costs spending in 2021 have generally become more focused on efficiency ratios.

If your benchmark for “normal” is last year, you risk navigating with a map drawn for different terrain. Industry surveys and company reporting indicate marketing budgets as a share of revenue have compressed in many sectors compared with peak years; the extent of that compression varies by business model, company size, and vertical. The practical decisions this informs are straightforward: how to allocate spend across channels, how to structure teams, how to measure outcomes when traditional attribution weakens, and how to pressure-test strategy against what higher-performing peers are doing.

Where the Budget Is Actually Going

B2C organizations commonly allocate a larger share of revenue to marketing than B2B counterparts. Consumer brands—especially those in retail and e-commerce—tend to show higher marketing intensity, while larger, established companies often operate with lower percentages thanks to brand equity and distribution leverage. Smaller companies typically spend more as a share of revenue to build awareness and demand.

Channel allocation matters more than top-line budget alone. Paid social’s share of digital budgets has declined in many cases over recent years; platform-level tracking changes have continued to affect Meta campaign economics, and many e-commerce advertisers report higher acquisition costs compared with earlier baselines. In response, marketers are reallocating toward paid search, connected TV, and owned channels where control and measurement are stronger. Email and other owned channels are often among the most cost-effective levers when list quality and segmentation are strong.

First-party data strategies are a key driver of that shift: as third-party signals erode, owned audiences can improve economics for some organizations. Under pressure to improve efficiency, organizations are looking to lower acquisition costs relative to recent years without scaling headcount proportionally. High-performing teams concentrate spend in channels where they can measure incrementality and pull back where attribution remains opaque; they typically avoid uniform cuts.

In B2B, research across multiple studies suggests much of the buyer journey occurs before direct vendor contact. Mid-market B2B companies that underinvest in brand-building frequently trade longer-term demand for short-term pipeline gains; in some cases that becomes a deferred liability rather than a true saving.

What High-Performers Measure Differently

For many organizations, attribution models capture only part of the customer journey. Journeys now span more touchpoints than any single-platform model can fully capture, and platform reporting can overstate on-platform contribution. Marketing Mix Modeling (MMM), which lost favor during the performance era, is seeing renewed interest because it does not rely on pixel-level tracking. Surveys and market signals show growing MMM adoption among larger advertisers; mid-market adoption often lags due to data volume and modeling costs.

How channels perform varies by context:

• Email often delivers strong ROI relative to many paid channels, especially where lists are well-segmented and engagement is high.
• SEO returns tend to accumulate over time, with material benefits typically evident over 12–24 months.
• Paid search ROI varies widely based on competitive intensity and conversion maturity.
• Paid social ROI ranges from low to high depending on creative quality, audience sophistication, and first-party data availability.

High-performing organizations track leading indicators alongside lagging ones: pipeline velocity, branded search volume, and share of voice in addition to closed-won revenue. In many B2B sales cycles, closed-won attribution lags by weeks or months; by the time it signals a problem, you may already be several quarters into a suboptimal allocation.

A simple measurement maturity framework clarifies where teams typically sit:

• Stage 1: Last-click attribution with limited cross-channel visibility.
• Stage 2: Multi-touch attribution connected to pipeline metrics.
• Stage 3: MMM and incrementality testing layered onto multi-touch data for a clearer view of channel contribution.

Many organizations operate between Stage 1 and Stage 2: they have adopted multi-touch tools but not yet changed the decisions they make with the data.

Team Structure and Capability Benchmarks

Marketing headcount per company employee varies by stage: growth-stage companies usually have higher marketing intensity per employee, while the ratio compresses at scale. Composition matters more than raw ratios. Too many teams over-index on content production and campaign management while being under-resourced in marketing operations, data analysis, and experimentation design. For example, a team producing lots of content but unable to run statistically valid A/B tests faces structural limits in optimizing spend.

Performance marketing has moved more in-house for many organizations, especially for paid search and programmatic where speed and data access matter. At the same time, creative and strategic work is increasingly being outsourced again in some cases; agencies are regaining roles in brand campaigns where external perspective adds more value. The hybrid model—internal ownership of performance channels and agency partnerships for creative and strategy—has become a common pattern.

AI integration is emerging as an operational competency rather than just a set of tools. Teams that implement formal AI workflows for content production, audience segmentation, and campaign optimization report more consistent efficiency gains in executional tasks. Where AI use is ad hoc and individual, results are often inconsistent; the difference typically lies in whether an operational model surrounds tool use.

Where Benchmarks Diverge by Vertical

Aggregate benchmarks can mislead without vertical context. Key patterns include:

• SaaS and technology: Tend to allocate more to marketing during growth phases, with emphasis on content, SEO, and events. MMM interest tends to be concentrated here.
• Retail and e-commerce: Face notable paid social disruption; many brands have seen higher CPAs and are shifting toward owned channels and loyalty programs.
• Professional services: Often operate with lower marketing intensity, relying heavily on referrals and relationships; digital investment is increasing from a low base.
• Healthcare and regulated industries: Channel and messaging constraints mean aggregate benchmarks are often less useful; compliance drives mix more than pure marketing economics.

Benchmark against peers by stage, business model, and market rather than aspirational giants. A Series B company that benchmarks against enterprise incumbents can draw misleading conclusions.

Turning Benchmarks Into Decisions

Benchmarks are diagnostic tools, not prescriptions. Use them to identify where you’re an outlier and to interrogate why. Being an outlier can indicate a strategic advantage; it can also expose an unexamined assumption. Use this checklist for your pre-planning strategy session:

• Is your spend-to-revenue ratio above or below benchmarks for your stage and model? Is the delta intentional?
• Are you investing in brand at a level that protects long-term demand, or are you over-indexed in performance marketing at the expense of future pipeline?
• Does your measurement infrastructure reflect Stage 2 maturity or higher, or are allocation decisions still based primarily on last-click data?
• Is your team structure weighted toward execution or strategy? Does that align with your growth objectives?
• Are you benchmarking against an appropriate peer cohort?

These questions tend to surface tensions that internal benchmarks often suppress because the answers challenge existing assumptions.

The Real Strategic Work

One of the riskiest positions for a CMO is not being below benchmark; it’s not knowing where you stand relative to it. Benchmarks surface the right questions rather than dictate exact choices. Metrics likely to matter more in the near term include AI workflow integration, coverage of first-party data relative to your addressable audience, and incrementality-tested channel contribution.

Many organizations are not yet measuring these consistently; establishing baselines now will provide useful reference points as these metrics become more common in board-level discussions. Otherwise, teams risk defaulting to last year’s internal numbers in a market that has continued to shift. Bring the checklist to your next leadership planning session. Track which questions generate the most disagreement—those are usually where the strategic work matters most.

Summary of Changes

• Em-dash logic converted to semicolons or separate sentences for clarity.
• Absolute and unsupported claims softened with qualifiers or generalized language.
• Sentence openers varied to reduce repetition and improve flow.
• Vague phrasing replaced with clearer descriptions or action prompts.
• Final sections tightened to focus on concrete takeaways and a short checklist.
• Redundant material trimmed to improve concision.