Who is Terenze Coleman?

A growth and product marketing lead based in Los Angeles, currently IP Marketing & Growth Lead at Musicow, a music-royalty investing marketplace. Previously product marketing at TikTok for the Media and Entertainment vertical, and programmatic media at Sony Pictures. Named to the Forbes 30 Under 30 list for Marketing and Advertising in 2026.

What is unusual about this profile?

He runs the acquisition and builds the systems that measure it. Most marketers own one or the other. He architected, specced and shipped six production systems alongside the marketing. Three of them split cleanly by time horizon, covering real-time daily optimization, monthly financial reconciliation, and campaign and catalog outcome tracking. The other three answer portfolio-level impact, plan against delivery, and owned-audience conversion. Choosing six architectures instead of defaulting to the one he already knew how to build is the decision worth asking about.

How technical is he really?

A marketer who specifies and ships software with Claude Code, not an engineer. He writes the PRD, designs the architecture, makes the API and schema decisions, designs the verification layer, and directs the build. He does not hand-write the implementation and does not claim to.

What kinds of roles does this record fit?

Growth and performance marketing leadership, product marketing led by a measurement through-line, entertainment and music-technology marketing, and technical or AI-native product management. Scope is lead-level with no direct reports, so senior individual contributor or lead rather than people manager.

What has he actually shipped?

The Showtimes Instant Page at TikTok, conceived and defined through general availability, which generated $19M in H1 2023 revenue at 100% adoption across covered theatrical clients. FANDOM at Musicow, a release brand taken from idea to a top 5,000 worldwide artist rank. fandomalbum.io, an award-winning Three.js album experience that is also one of the six systems. And five internal production systems for outcome measurement, financial control, daily optimization, portfolio impact and plan against delivery.

How should his numbers be read?

Every figure on this site is locked to one value and one label in a single master record, refreshed on 2026-09-16. Stream figures are Luminate-reported. Listener and ranking figures are Chartmetric or Spotify for Artists. The 952,788 monthly listeners is a peak from the May 22 to June 18 window and is never stated as a current figure, because monthly listeners is a rolling 28-day number. Two figures in the September export are deliberately not adopted here, because both had already been settled against it on platform data.

How do I contact him?

By email at terenzecoleman@gmail.com, or on LinkedIn at linkedin.com/in/terenzecoleman.

Benchmarks case study

Benchmark Scorecard, 2025 to 2026 · 28 metrics, each against an external median or target

Benchmarks

What good looks like, and how every metric was graded

A new artist project has no history to grade itself against, so I built a scorecard that puts every headline metric next to an external 2025 to 2026 industry median or target, with the source named. 27 of the 28 metrics sit at or better than the benchmark. The one that does not, TikTok organic engagement per view, is the clearest owned-content lever in the program, and the scorecard is what surfaced it.

Metrics graded

each against an external median or target

At or better

27 of the 28 metrics sit at or better than the benchmark

0.44%

The one below

TikTok organic engagement per view, against a 4.2% benchmark

$1.50

Blended CPM, all paid

against a $7 to $14 median

01Why this exists

Context

Ad platforms report their own numbers in their own definitions, and every channel can be made to look good on the wrong metric. The scorecard exists so that nobody, including me, grades a reach channel on conversions or a conversion channel on CPM, and so that "cheap" and "strong" mean something outside the account.

02Method

How the scorecard works

Each channel is judged on the metric that matches its job: Google and YouTube on view rate, CPM and CPV; TikTok, Meta, Snapchat and Reddit on link CTR, CPM and CPC; Spotify Marquee on cost per converted listener; the Musicow app on CPI and funnel conversion; influencer on CPM, cost per view, engagement rate and cost per post.

CTR and CPC use real link clicks. Google's figure is a YouTube view rate, not a click-through rate, and is graded as one. For CPM, CPC, CPV and CPI lower is better; for CTR, view rate and engagement higher is better. Benchmarks are never added to any total. App metrics are graded against fintech benchmarks, not general-app benchmarks, because Musicow asks users to complete KYC and link a bank account. Our values link live from the workbook's other tabs, so the scorecard updates when the data does.

03Graded against the market

The scorecard

Every metric against its external median or target, restated as how many times better or worse than that benchmark the result is, so a cost and a rate can sit on one axis. The filter narrows the board to a group, and the toggle swaps the plot for the table it is drawn from.

Beats benchmarkMisses benchmarkIndustry median

CPC (link)Meta
12.5xbetter
$0.057 against a benchmark of $0.70 traffic. Well below. Source: WordStream.
CPCSnapchat
12.5xbetter
$0.068 against a benchmark of $0.84 median. Well below. Source: Gupta Media / AdLiftr.
CPCTikTok
10.0xbetter
$0.049 against a benchmark of $0.50 median. About 9x cheaper. Source: Varos.
CPMGoogle / YouTube
7.7xbetter
$0.81 against a benchmark of $3 to $10 video. Well below, top tier. Source: DigitalApplied.
CPMTikTok
7.1xbetter
$1.84 against a benchmark of $4 to $15 (about $13 median). Well below. Source: Triple Whale.
Cost per viewInfluencer
7.1xbetter
$0.0042 against a benchmark of $0.02 to $0.04. About 6x cheaper. Source: Influencer Marketing Hub.
Blended CPMAll paid
6.7xbetter
$1.50 against a benchmark of $7 to $14 median. Far below, top tier. Source: WebFX / Triple Whale.
CPVGoogle / YouTube
6.3xbetter
$0.0041 against a benchmark of $0.02 to $0.03. About 6x cheaper. Source: Store Growers.
CTR (link)TikTok
4.5xbetter
3.7% against a benchmark of 1% (0.84% average). 4x above. Source: Triple Whale / WebFX.
CTR (link)Meta
4.5xbetter
4.0% against a benchmark of 0.9% average. 4x above. Source: WordStream.
CTR (link)Snapchat
3.5xbetter
3.6% against a benchmark of 1.0% (2.5% strong). Well above. Source: Gupta Media / AdLiftr.
CPMSnapchat
3.4xbetter
$2.45 against a benchmark of $8.39 average. Well below. Source: Gupta Media.
CPI, blended (fintech)App install
3.3xbetter
$2.99 against a benchmark of $10+ fintech average. Far below, excellent. Source: Business of Apps.
CPMMeta
3.2xbetter
$2.30 against a benchmark of $7.47 Facebook average. Below average, good. Source: WebFX / Sovran.
Cost per funded user (first purchase)Funnel
3.1xbetter
$458 against a benchmark of About $1,450 fintech CAC. Far below CAC, strong. Source: First Page Sage / Prospeo.
CPCReddit
2.6xbetter
$0.231 against a benchmark of $0.20 to $1.50. In range, good. Source: Affect Group.
Cost per registrationFunnel
2.6xbetter
$11.72 against a benchmark of About $30 (KYC alone $20 to $30). Below, strong. Source: Red Branch / Youyaa.
CPI, Android (fintech)App install
2.5xbetter
$1.50 against a benchmark of $3.70 fintech Android. Far below, excellent. Source: Business of Apps.
Engagement rateInfluencer
2.4xbetter
12.0% against a benchmark of 2 to 6% micro tier. Far above, top tier. Source: InfluenceFlow.
CPMReddit
2.2xbetter
$1.82 against a benchmark of $2 to $6 standard. Below range, good. Source: Stackmatix.
Cost per postInfluencer
1.9xbetter
$160 against a benchmark of $125 to $1,250 mid tier. Low-mid tier, good value. Source: Influencer Marketing Hub.
CTR (link)Reddit
1.6xbetter
0.8% against a benchmark of 0.2 to 0.8% (1% strong). High end, solid. Source: AdBacklog.
Cost per converted listenerSpotify Marquee
1.6xbetter
$0.64 against a benchmark of $0.50 to $1.50. In range, efficient. Source: Industry estimate.
CPMInfluencer
1.6xbetter
$4.24 against a benchmark of $3 to $10 typical. In range, solid. Source: Page One / Awisee.
View rateGoogle / YouTube
1.4xbetter
20.5% against a benchmark of 15% in-stream. Strong. Source: Store Growers.
Install to registrationFunnel
1.4xbetter
50.4% against a benchmark of 30 to 40% finance activation. Above norm, strong. Source: CleverTap / Business of Apps.
CPI, iOS (fintech)App install
1.2xbetter
$10.10 against a benchmark of $10 to $35 fintech iOS (North America). Low end, solid. Source: Mobile Dev Memo / Business of Apps.
Engagement per viewTikTok organic
9.1xworse
0.44% against a benchmark of About 4.2% (good 4 to 8%). Below benchmark, opportunity. Source: Emplicit / Social Insider.

10x worsebenchmark10x better

10x worse3x worsebenchmark3x better10x better

Every row prints its own result, benchmark and source. Hover or tab through one to pull it out here.

04The read

What the scorecard shows

Every social and search channel beat its CTR or view-rate benchmark, and every CPM, CPC and CPV ran well below its median. Paid influencer cleared its benchmarks on cost per view and engagement across four agencies and 544 posts. Spotify Marquee converted listeners inside its expected range. Judged against fintech rather than general-app norms, app installs were excellent at a blended $2.99, iOS sat at the low end of the fintech range at $10.10, and a funded user cost $458 against a fintech CAC near $1,450.

Two levers came out of it. The KYC to bank-link step in the Musicow funnel converts at 15.2%, and lifting it to 30% roughly doubles funded users at no media cost. TikTok organic engagement per view on the owned account runs at 0.44% against a 4.2% benchmark, which is the one place the program's owned content is behind and the first thing to fix on the next release.

Below benchmarkthe one row on the board where the benchmark won

Metric: TikTok organic engagement per view
Our result: 0.44%
Benchmark: About 4.2% (good 4 to 8%)
Read: Below benchmark, opportunity
Source: Emplicit / Social Insider

It is on the board for the same reason every other row is: a scorecard that only prints wins is a brochure. This one is owned content rather than media, so it costs attention to fix rather than budget.

05Findings

What I learned

A metric without a benchmark is a number, not a result.
$1.50 CPM means nothing until it sits next to a $7 to $14 median with the source named.
Grade the job, not the channel.
Google video looks catastrophic at $360.70 per platform result because its result field counts conversion actions, not views. The same spend bought views at $0.0041. Judge video on CPV, never on cost per result.
Pick the right peer set.
A general-app CPI benchmark would have made a $10.10 iOS install look expensive. Against fintech, where KYC and bank linking are the norm, it is at the low end.
Keep benchmarks out of the totals.
They grade the program; they never inflate it.