Two markets, one deadline, and a +23% result Moneybird could defend.
Not a gamble on automation, but a deliberate decision, tested first, then steered.

We began conservative, but the test showed broad, automated search delivered far stronger market penetration. We shifted the whole approach and captured demand more efficiently than manual ever could.Download the Google case study (PDF)
Moneybird wanted to scale sign-ups across a mature home market and a brand-new neighbouring one.
Two markets with opposite needs: incremental, cheaper growth in NL versus fast penetration in BE before the Peppol deadline.
Move beyond manual paid search that was missing high-intent demand, without losing control of cost or direction.
Mapped both markets, the Peppol-driven demand surge in Belgium, and the high-intent keywords manual campaigns had been missing in the Netherlands.
Started deliberately conservative, then let a clear A/B test decide direction: AI Max for Search, set per market, with sign-ups as the single objective.
Active campaign management with continuous keyword monitoring, scaling into AI Max as the evidence came in and steering budget to the strongest demand.
Paid search expanded across the full product range, capturing high-intent demand that manual effort had missed.
Evidence from a live A/B test set the strategy; the shift to automation was a deliberate, controlled decision rather than a bet.
Netherlands: cost per sign-up down 80%, sign-ups up 23%. Belgium: sign-ups up 12%.


