.svg)
B2B Industrial Funnel Audit: Brand Site to Store Conversion
Only 3.6% of visitors found the store
A multi-brand industrial equipment company had ten brand sites and a parts store sitting on a different domain, and only 3.6% of brand site visitors ever found their way to it. We graded them and four competitors on the same components, with screenshots behind every score. The problem was not the brand or the creative.
At a glance
3.6% CTR
Brand site to store
10
Brand sites in the stack
9+
Contact form fields
Capabilities used
The problem
The site looked fine, which is exactly the problem with most B2B industrial funnels. The store itself worked: anyone could browse parts, see prices, and add to cart without logging in. It just lived on a separate domain with no cart icon anywhere on the brand site, so most buyers never learned they could buy at all. Only 3.6% of brand site visitors clicked through to the store, against 18.4% for a comparable operator. The contact form asked for nine or more fields plus fourteen checkboxes. Ten brand sites with no tracking between them meant nobody could follow a buyer from first visit to order. None of that shows up in a creative review, and all of it leaks demand before a single dollar of media gets spent.
The fulcrum
The highest-leverage change we could make
Before recommending anything, the highest-leverage move was to make the gap visible. Opinions about a website are cheap and easy to argue with. A grade next to a competitor's grade is not. We scored the company and four competitors, including two national industrial suppliers and two direct category rivals, on the same components: capture, cadence, messaging, segmentation, how easy it is to actually buy something, and the measurement stack underneath. Everything was graded against best practice rather than on a curve, every score had a screenshot behind it, and the tracking claims were verified against each site's own page source. That turns a vague sense that the site is underperforming into a specific, sequenced list of what to fix first.
Applying force
What happened, and what we scaled into
The scorecard did what it was supposed to do, which was end the debate about where the problem was. • Email capture and lifecycle segmentation: the two weakest grades, and the ones pulling the overall score down • Creative and brand: not the bottleneck • Account registration: the strongest in the peer set at four fields • None of the four competitors graded out as an A either • 3.6% of brand-site visitors reached the store, against 18.4% for a comparable operator The most valuable finding was that the store was never the problem, its discoverability was. The sequenced path forward was written, but the engagement ended after the scorecard, so nothing was implemented and there is no lift window to point at. Read this as a diagnostic, not a revenue result. The next force step is the boring one: put a cart on the brand site, cut the form down, connect tracking across the ten domains, then scale spend into a funnel that can hold it.
Why this matters
Plenty of B2B industrial sites look credible and measure almost nothing. Grading yourself against the competitors your buyers are actually comparing you to is the fastest way to see that in one sitting. If only one in twenty-five visitors can find your store, more ad budget will not fix it, it will just pay to send more people past the door. We do this work before scaling spend, not after. If you want the same readout on your funnel, start at /grow.
Most engagements fail at the handoff between strategy and execution. Levered doesn't hand off — we own both.