What is the 70/20/10 rule for a marketing budget?

Spend 70% of the budget on proven channels and programs with a known CPA, 20% on promising bets adjacent to what already works, and 10% on experiments with no track record. On a $1.6M budget that is $1.12M proven, $320k adjacent and $160k experimental. Apply it to acquisition spend, not to headcount or tools.

Where does the 70/20/10 rule come from?

The split was popularized by Coca-Cola’s 2011 “Content 2020” strategy (70% low-risk content, 20% innovative, 10% high-risk) and echoes the 70/20/10 innovation model Google used for engineering time. Neither was a budgeting benchmark; marketing teams adopted the ratio because it gives a defensible answer to “how much should we experiment?”.

Is the 70/20/10 rule right for B2B SaaS?

As a starting point, yes, provided the 70% really is proven at target CPA. Growth-stage SaaS companies often justify 60/25/15 because new channels compound; companies under cost pressure drift to 80/15/5. The number that matters more than the split is the evaluation timeline on every item in the 30%: no more than one quarter.

What is the 3-3-3 rule for marketing?

There is no single definition. The most common version says test three channels, with three messages, for three months before judging results. Treat it as a testing cadence for the 20% and 10% buckets, not as a way to split the budget. The guide’s own cadence is one new initiative per quarter, evaluated inside that quarter.

What is the 80/20 rule in a marketing budget?

Two different things share the name. The Pareto observation that roughly 80% of conversions come from 20% of channels is an argument for concentrating spend. The 80/20 budget split (80% proven, 20% new) is the conservative version of 70/20/10 and is where most budgets land in a year with a flat or reduced total.

How do I track the 70/20/10 split during the year?

Tag every acquisition line item with a continuity property (existing or new) and a business goal, then report spend by that tag monthly alongside budget vs actual. If the “new” share drifts above plan without a matching conversion contribution, that is the signal to pause the weakest experiment rather than add another one.

The 70/20/10 Rule for Marketing Budgets: Meaning, Example, When to Ignore It

The 70/20/10 rule allocates 70% of the marketing budget to channels and programs with a proven CPA, 20% to promising bets adjacent to what already works, and 10% to experiments with no track record. It is a portfolio heuristic for balancing safe and speculative spend, not a benchmark for how much to spend. This chapter shows the split on a real budget, where it holds, where it breaks, and how to build it into the budget structure so it can be tracked.

What the 70/20/10 rule says

Share	Bucket	What goes in it	What you know about it
70%	Proven	Channels and programs that hit target CPA last year: paid search on branded and core terms, the events that produced pipeline, the content program that ranks	Conversion volume, CPA and scalability limits from last year's data
20%	Adjacent	Extensions of what works: a proven channel in a new market, a new format on a platform that already converts, a second conference in a vertical that worked	A credible CPA estimate, because the mechanism is known
10%	Experimental	Channels, platforms or tactics with no internal track record	A hypothesis and an evaluation date, nothing more

The split was popularized by Coca-Cola's 2011 “Content 2020” strategy (70% low-risk content, 20% innovative, 10% high-risk) and mirrors the 70/20/10 model Google used for engineering time. Neither was a budgeting study; the ratio spread because it gives a defensible answer to the question every CEO asks at some point: how much of this is a bet?

A worked example on a $1.6M budget

Apply it to acquisition spend, not to the whole budget. Headcount and tools are not bets; they are the cost of running the program. The example company from the budgeting methods chapter has a $1.6M budget of which $850k is acquisition spend (paid media, promotion, contractors).

Bucket	Amount	Example line items	Evaluation
Proven (70%)	$595,000	Paid search $260k, LinkedIn ABM $120k, two flagship conferences $90k, content and SEO program $125k	Monthly against target CPA
Adjacent (20%)	$170,000	Paid search in the DACH market $80k, LinkedIn video on the working audience $40k, a vertical conference $50k	Quarterly; CPA within 1.5× the proven channel's
Experimental (10%)	$85,000	Podcast sponsorships $35k, a partner co-marketing program $30k, community sponsorship $20k	One quarter each; stop or promote to adjacent

70/20/10 applied to $850k of acquisition spend inside a $1.6M budget. Headcount ($620k) and tools ($130k) sit outside the split.

Write the evaluation rule into the line item before the money is spent. “Podcast sponsorships: 3 months, 40 MQLs at under $900 CPA or stop” is a bet. “Podcast sponsorships: $35k” is a hope.

When the rule works

The 70% is genuinely proven. If last year's channels are still above target CPA, the 30% of speculative spend is affordable because the base is carrying the target.
Growth is the mandate. Companies with an exploratory approach (see the growth and risk approaches on the hub) can run 60/25/15 because new channels compound; the split is a floor for experimentation, not a cap.
Each bet has a timeline. The rule only works as a portfolio if losing bets are stopped inside a quarter and the budget moves back to the proven bucket.
It is tracked. Without a new-versus-existing tag on line items, the split is a slide, not a budget.

When to ignore it

In a cut year. When the total is reduced, the experimental bucket goes first and 80/15/5 is closer to what survives finance review. Defend the adjacent bucket instead; it has the better expected return.
In an early-stage company. When nothing is proven yet, 70% of the budget cannot go to proven channels. The honest split is closer to 40/40/20 with faster evaluation cycles, until two channels reach target CPA.
Across the whole budget. Applying 70/20/10 to headcount and tools produces nonsense (“10% of the salary budget is experimental”). Apply it to acquisition spend only.
When the 70% is not actually working. A proven channel whose CPA has doubled is no longer proven. Re-classify it before allocating; otherwise the rule locks in yesterday's mix.

The most common failure is using 70/20/10 as an argument for keeping every existing program. The 70% bucket is for programs that hit target CPA, not for programs that exist.

The 3-3-3 rule, 80/20 and other splits

Rule	What it says	How to treat it
3-3-3 rule	The most common version: test three channels, with three messages, for three months before judging results. Other versions exist; there is no single definition	A testing cadence for the 20% and 10% buckets, not a budget split. The guide's own cadence is one new initiative per quarter, evaluated inside the quarter
80/20 (Pareto)	Roughly 80% of conversions come from 20% of channels	An argument for concentrating spend and for the 70% bucket being few channels, not many
80/20 split	80% proven, 20% new	The conservative version of 70/20/10; where most budgets land in a flat year
60/40 brand vs performance	60% long-term brand building, 40% short-term activation (Binet and Field)	A different axis (time horizon, not risk). B2B SaaS budgets under $5M rarely reach 60% brand; treat it as a direction for mature companies
50/30/20	A personal-finance rule (needs, wants, savings)	Not a marketing rule, despite appearing in the same search results

How to apply it in your budget structure

Tag every acquisition line item with the item continuity property (existing or new) and a business goal, as described in the categories chapter. Proven is existing at target CPA; adjacent and experimental are both new, distinguished by whether a CPA estimate exists.
Add the split to the “new vs existing initiatives” chart in your approval deck. Finance reads a high new-initiative share as risk; the 70/20/10 framing turns it into a managed portfolio.
Report spend by bucket monthly next to budget vs actual. If the new share drifts above plan without a matching conversion contribution, pause the weakest experiment before adding another.
At each quarter end, promote or stop: an experiment that hit its rule moves to adjacent, an adjacent bet at target CPA moves to proven, and the freed budget funds the next test.

The 70/20/10 Rule for Marketing Budgets: What It Means and When to Ignore It