Ads in 2026: More creatives or better creatives?

A common question Minh gets is: "Should we test a lot of creatives and let Facebook find winners, or produce fewer but better creatives?"

After spending time in Performance Marketing, Minh still leans toward one answer: quality first, quantity second.

The reason is simple. When teams focus only on volume, creative testing can turn into a "spray and pray" process. The idea is weak, the message is unclear, the angle does not solve a real customer problem — but ads are launched nonstop anyway. The result is usually wasted budget, wasted production time, and short-lived winners.

On the other hand, when quality comes first, each creative has a clear purpose:

• Which winning ad are we trying to beat?
• What variable are we improving (hook, angle, opening, CTA)?
• What is the hypothesis?

Minh sees creative testing as a disciplined loop: Idea → Hypothesis → Test → Learn → Optimize, with kill thresholds set before launch. Done right, even losing creatives produce useful learning.

One point that matters a lot: quantity only works when the quality foundation is already strong. If the process is weak and the message is not sharp, increasing volume only helps you fail faster. But once the framework is clear, scaling production can help the account grow. On Google Ads, the creative testing framework works the same way.

So if you are choosing between quality and quantity in 2026: do not choose "more" first. Choose "better" first, then scale with systems and teamwork.

Sustainable ads are not about testing the most. They are about testing with intention and learning faster than competitors — and when everything stalls, change the test axis rather than the details.