Instagram ads that don't look like ads.

Same answer as Facebook, because it's the same auction: there's no set price, you bid for attention and pay mostly per impression. The number that matters is what a sale can afford to cost you, worked back from your margin.

The calculator on this page sorts that in a minute, and fees sit openly on the pricing page.

Most accounts run both from one campaign and let Meta serve wherever each person is. The split follows your customer: younger, visual, discovery-led buyers lean Instagram; broader and older audiences lean Facebook.

You rarely have to choose. You do have to give each platform creative that suits it.

You can, and it's the fastest way to waste money. The feeds look different, move at different speeds and expect different framing. An ad built for one rarely lands in the other.

Run the same offer by all means. Build the creative to fit where it shows.

Not strictly. Meta can run Instagram ads using just your Facebook Page, though they show without a clickable profile behind them.

A real, active Instagram account is far better: people tap the handle, check you're legitimate, and a bare or empty profile quietly costs you sales.

Feed ads sit in the scroll and can hold detail. Stories are full-screen and gone in seconds, so the hook has to be instant. Reels is short vertical video and where the cheapest reach is right now.

Same campaign can use all three. Each one wants creative shaped for it, not the same image dropped into every slot.

For most accounts right now, yes. Reels is where Instagram is pushing attention, which means reach is cheaper there than in the feed while the rest of the market catches up.

The catch is it demands real video. A static image with music stapled on gets ignored, and the wasted reach is on your tab.

Anything that looks good and appeals to a browsing, design-led crowd: fashion, beauty, food, homewares, fitness, travel, lifestyle. If your product photographs well, Instagram is built for you.

If it's hard to show or aimed at an older, purely practical buyer, the budget often works harder elsewhere.

Very well. Creator content often outperforms studio-polished ads because it reads as real, and the strongest performers can be run as ads through the creator's handle with their permission.

It blends the trust of a recommendation with the reach of paid. The setup is worth getting right rather than guessing at.

Yes. Shop tags turn products in your posts and ads into tappable links, and for the right catalogue it shortens the path from scroll to checkout.

It needs a connected product catalogue and tidy setup to work smoothly, which is exactly where most stores leave money on the table.

It isn't, underneath. Both draw from the same Meta audience system, so you target the same way and the same privacy changes apply.

What differs is who's actually there to reach. Instagram skews younger and more visual, so the audience you can build leans that way too.

Usually the ad entertains without asking for anything. Engagement is easy on Instagram; a clear offer and an obvious next step are what turn a watcher into a buyer.

Check the journey too: a polished ad pointing at a slow or clumsy mobile page loses the sale after the click, not before it.

It can, with the right look. A cafe, salon, gym or venue with photogenic results and a local audience does well; a trade chased by people mid-emergency is better served by Google.

The test is simple: would a photo of the work make someone stop scrolling? If yes, Instagram has a job to do.

More than one, fewer than you fear. Three or four truly different angles gives the auction enough to find a winner without spreading the budget too thin.

One ad isn't a test, it's a guess. The early job is finding which idea resonates, then putting budget behind it.