Distribution of hours-to-purchase after a campaign send. Tight cluster <24h = strong send; long tail = weak hook.
At a glance
The distribution of hours between a Mailchimp campaign send and the resulting attributed purchase, computed across the top 10 revenue-generating campaigns in the period. Buckets: <1h, 1-4h, 4-12h, 12-24h, >24h. A tight cluster <24h means the campaign hooks immediate-purchase intent (good); a long tail beyond 24h means the campaign builds awareness but doesn’t drive immediate action (the hook is weak). Mailchimp’s 24h click attribution default means anything beyond 24h is unattributed; the >24h bucket here captures click-then-bookmark-then-buy patterns visible only via UTM matching.
Calculation
Calculated automatically from your Mailchimp data. See the At a glance summary above for what the metric tracks and the worked example below for a typical reading.Worked example
A small DTC kitchenware brand on Shopify, Mailchimp Standard. Top 3 campaigns over 90D window 02 Feb 26 to 02 May 26.
Five observations:
- Mother’s Day’s lag profile is textbook strong. 70% of orders within 4 hours of send, 84% within 12 hours. The campaign creates immediate purchase intent because the deadline (Mother’s Day) is concrete and the product is gift-able. A campaign with this lag profile justifies the broadcast send model, you’re hitting an intent-rich window.
- Spring sale is good but slower than Mother’s Day. The flash sale draws purchases over a longer window (24% in the 4-24h bucket) because customers want to compare before buying. This is healthy for promotional sends; the 3-day duration of the flash matches the buying-cycle behaviour. Don’t push customers harder; let them browse.
- The March newsletter is a weak hook. 50% of orders fall in the >24h bucket, which means the newsletter raised awareness but didn’t drive action. Customers came back days later via direct visits or organic search. Mailchimp’s 24h attribution doesn’t credit these orders, so the newsletter’s reported revenue understates its actual contribution. For awareness-style sends, Email Share of Total Store Revenue is the better metric than per-campaign attributed revenue.
- The list-based blast pattern shows up in the lag distribution. Mother’s Day went to the full list including dormant subscribers; among the dormant subscribers who did buy, lag was longer (because they need more time to re-engage with the brand). Segmented sends to “engaged 60d” subscribers would produce a tighter lag profile across all three campaigns. This is the segmentation-vs-list debate quantified.
- The >24h bucket is the under-credited revenue bucket. Mailchimp doesn’t attribute orders beyond 24h to the campaign that drove awareness. For awareness-heavy newsletters and brand campaigns, the >24h share can be 30-60%, meaning Mailchimp’s e-commerce-attributed revenue substantially understates the actual contribution. Use this card to identify newsletters where the long tail is doing real work.
Sibling cards merchants should reference together
Reconciling against the vendor’s own dashboard
Where to look in Mailchimp’s own dashboard: Mailchimp does not surface this distribution natively. The closest views are Mailchimp → Reports → individual campaign → E-Commerce tab which shows orders per campaign without lag bucketing, and Mailchimp → Reports → Comparative Reports which doesn’t bucket by lag either. This card is a Vortex IQ-derived distribution computed by joining Mailchimp send_time with commerce platform order created_at. Why our number may legitimately differ from a hand-built calculation:
Cross-connector reconciliation (this is the central purpose):