Yelp Ads vs Google LSA vs Meta Ads: Cost Per Acquisition Compared Across 6 Local Service Categories

Why CPA Comparisons Across Platforms Are Usually Wrong

Most local business owners compare Yelp, Google Local Service Ads, and Meta by looking at cost per lead reported inside each platform's dashboard. That's the first mistake.

Platform-reported CPL ignores three things that actually determine your real cost per acquisition:

1. Close rate by lead source — a $30 Yelp lead that closes at 10% costs you $300 per job. A $90 Google LSA lead that closes at 40% costs you $225. (For a deeper look at how this distorts reported numbers, see our article Close Rate by Lead Source: What It Does to Your Real CAC.) 2. Conversion lag — Meta leads, in particular, often take 7–21 days to convert. If you're cutting Meta campaigns at day 14 because 'nothing is working,' you're pulling the plug on revenue that was already in motion. See Conversion Lag by Campaign Type: Stop Cutting Early. 3. Blended CAC distortion — when a high-CPL channel is running alongside a low-CPL channel, the low-CPL channel gets credit for assists it didn't earn. Your blended CAC looks better than it is, and the wrong channel gets the budget.

This article uses labeled illustrative models — not invented research — to show how the math actually works across six common local service categories.

The Framework: Three Inputs, One Real Number

Before comparing platforms, agree on the formula:

Real CPA = Platform CPL ÷ Lead-to-Job Close Rate

Then layer in average job value to get ROAS:

ROAS = Average Job Revenue ÷ Real CPA

Everything else is noise. Run this model for each channel separately, then compare. Here's what makes each platform behave differently:

• Google LSA (Local Service Ads): Captures bottom-of-funnel, high-intent searches ('emergency plumber near me'). Leads arrive warm. Google's pay-per-lead model means you're only charged for contacts, not clicks — but disputed leads require manual review and the credit process is imperfect.
• Yelp Ads: Captures mid-funnel comparison shoppers. Users are actively evaluating multiple providers. Intent is real, but competition on the page is high — competitor ads appear on your own Yelp listing unless you pay to suppress them.
• Meta Ads (Facebook/Instagram): Top-to-mid funnel. Users are not searching — you're interrupting. Leads are typically colder, close rates are lower, but volume potential is higher and creative targeting can build brand familiarity over time. CPL can look attractive while real CPA is quietly high.

Illustrative CPA Models Across 6 Service Categories

These are labeled illustrative models built from the framework above — not cited benchmark research. Use them as a decision template, then plug in your own numbers.

1. Residential HVAC (avg job value: ~$3,000–$6,000)

• Google LSA: illustrative CPL $80–$140, close rate ~35–45% → real CPA ~$200–$400 → strong ROAS
• Yelp Ads: illustrative CPL $60–$110, close rate ~20–30% → real CPA ~$220–$500 → moderate, depends on market
• Meta Ads: illustrative CPL $30–$60, close rate ~10–18% → real CPA ~$200–$550 → works for brand + retargeting, weak cold

2. Residential Plumbing (avg job value: ~$400–$1,200)

• Google LSA: performs best here — emergency intent, low lag, close rates typically high
• Yelp: defensible for non-emergency (installs, remodels), weaker for emergency where speed wins
• Meta: rarely cost-effective for plumbing unless used for retargeting past customers

3. Roofing (avg job value: ~$8,000–$18,000)

• Google LSA: high CPL (illustrative $150–$300+) but high job value makes ROAS strong if close rates hold
• Yelp: smaller role; roofing decisions are high-stakes and review-heavy — Yelp's review ecosystem can help organic, less so paid
• Meta: effective for storm-damage campaigns with creative urgency; leads need longer nurture runway

4. House Cleaning / Maid Services (avg job value: ~$150–$350/visit, but LTV matters)

• Meta wins on volume and LTV math — a $50 CPL on a customer worth $2,000/year over 18 months is excellent ROAS
• Google LSA: solid, especially for first-time bookings
• Yelp: competitive; price-sensitive comparison shoppers make close rates inconsistent

5. Landscaping / Lawn Care (avg job value: ~$200–$800/visit, seasonal)

• Meta: seasonal creative campaigns (spring/fall) can drive strong volume
• Google LSA: available in select markets; where active, captures high-intent leads efficiently
• Yelp: moderate performer; reviews matter heavily in this category

6. Legal Services — Personal Injury / Family Law (avg case value: highly variable)

• Google LSA: dominant channel; intent is explicit and urgency is high
• Meta: growing for family law (less acute urgency, more research phase) — but conversion lag is significant
• Yelp: limited role; trust is built through reviews, not display ads

Where Yelp Spend Becomes Indefensible

Yelp Ads earn their budget in specific conditions:

✅ You have strong Yelp reviews (4.3+ stars, 30+ reviews) — the ad amplifies existing social proof ✅ Your category is review-driven (restaurants, salons, home services in review-conscious markets) ✅ You're in a market where Yelp has high local penetration

Yelp becomes a silent CAC inflator when:

❌ You're paying for clicks that land on a page showing competitors' ads (standard behavior unless you pay to suppress) ❌ Your close rate from Yelp leads is below 15% and you haven't diagnosed why ❌ You're in an emergency-intent category where speed and proximity win — Yelp shoppers deliberate, they don't call immediately ❌ Your Yelp reviews are thin or mixed — the ad drives traffic to a page that actively works against you

The test: pull your last 90 days of Yelp leads. Apply your actual close rate. Divide total Yelp spend by closed jobs. If that real CPA exceeds 20–25% of average job value, the channel is underperforming by most reasonable benchmarks.

How Budget Misallocation Distorts Blended ROAS

Here's the mechanism that trips up most local advertisers running two or three channels simultaneously:

Illustrative model: Suppose you're spending $2,000/month — $800 on Google LSA, $700 on Yelp, $500 on Meta. Your dashboard shows 60 total leads at a blended CPL of ~$33. Looks efficient.

But when you break it down:

• Google LSA: 18 leads, 40% close rate = 7.2 jobs
• Yelp: 22 leads, 18% close rate = 4 jobs
• Meta: 20 leads, 12% close rate = 2.4 jobs

Google LSA produced 53% of the closed jobs on 40% of the budget. Yelp produced 29% of jobs on 35% of the budget — passable. Meta produced 17% of jobs on 25% of the budget — drag.

The blended number hid the drag. Platform-level CPA reporting without close rate layering always flatters the underperforming channels.

Also worth noting: Meta leads frequently convert outside the attribution window you've set. If your window is 7 days and the average Meta-to-booking lag in your category is 14 days, you're under-counting Meta conversions AND possibly over-spending on LSA to compensate. See Ad Scheduling Attribution Gap: Why Dayparting Fails for a related version of this problem.

The Allocation Decision: A 3-Question Filter

Before your next budget cycle, answer these three questions for each channel:

1. What is the actual intent state of my customer when they encounter this ad?

• Searching with urgency → Google LSA wins
• Comparing providers → Yelp competes
• Not searching at all → Meta requires nurture budget and patience

2. What is my verified close rate from this channel over the last 60–90 days? If you don't have this number, you are flying blind. Tag leads by source in your CRM or even a spreadsheet. Calculate close rate separately per channel. This single step changes every budget decision you make.

3. Does my real CPA (CPL ÷ close rate) produce a defensible ROAS given my average job value? A rough rule of thumb: real CPA should be no more than 15–25% of average job value for the channel to be worth defending at current spend. Adjust up for high-LTV categories (recurring services), down for one-time, low-margin jobs.

Channels that fail question 3 don't necessarily get cut — but they get restructured. Meta at a weak CPA might still earn budget as a retargeting layer or brand-building vehicle, not a direct-response lead engine.

Bottom Line

No single platform wins across all six categories. Google LSA leads on intent and close rate efficiency for most trade and emergency categories. Yelp is defensible in review-driven markets with strong profile equity. Meta earns its budget in high-LTV categories and retargeting — not as a cold-lead workhorse for low-margin services.

The real risk isn't picking the wrong platform. It's running all three without a close-rate tracking system, letting blended CPL mask where the budget is actually leaking.

If you're unsure whether your current Yelp, LSA, or Meta spend is producing defensible ROAS — or if your dashboards look fine but closed jobs don't match — that's exactly the kind of problem we diagnose in a first call.

[Book a strategy call with Nika Spark →] We'll pull your actual channel mix apart, apply your real close rates, and show you where the budget should move.