Technically, I'd pick A here. The null usually tests for no difference (Conversions A = Conversions B), not both being zero. Unless the question meant a totally inactive campaign, it's a subtle trap. Anyone have a different read?

This is straight from recent practice sets, pretty sure it's C. Phrasing is weird but Facebook goes with literal zero conversions as the null. If you want more on this, the official guide explains test setup too.

A here imo. Even though younger guys spent more on average, at a 90% confidence you need real statistical significance, not just a gap in means. Without enough evidence to pass that threshold, you can't say there's a difference. Pretty sure that's right but happy to see other takes.

Looks like A is the right one here. The sample averages are different, but at the 90% confidence level, you’d need a statistically significant difference to say anything for sure. Without a reported p-value under 0.10 or clear evidence, it’s safest to say there’s not enough proof. I think that’s what they want with A, but if anyone sees different stats in the image I missed, let me know!

Not D, the trap is thinking the mean difference proves significance. A.

A . I had something like this in a mock-since the average spend for younger men is higher, but with a 90% confidence level, unless the difference is statistically significant, you can't claim there's a real difference. The sample means alone aren’t enough without supporting stats (like p-value). Pretty sure that's what they're testing here. Open to corrections if I missed something in the stats!

Likely C. Just running both strategies at the same time and comparing conversions is what most Facebook Blueprint questions expect unless it says anything about needing statistical rigor. D is tempting since multi-cell tests are more scientific, but I think that's overkill here. Pretty sure C fits unless I'm missing some detail. Agree?

I would say B. World Cup CPMs are notoriously high, so even if there's a sales lift the ROI can be below average. I think that's a reasonable context for the result, but could see why others pick A.

Not sure if it's D or C, honestly. Depends how strict they're being about what counts as really skewing the analysis vs just being slightly outside the cluster.

I don't think it's C. D makes more sense because only three points are true outliers that would seriously skew the results, not just distant from cluster. Some in-between points might look odd but don't really affect the trend much.

A imo , pretty sure. The analyst likely saw data showing the demographic group delivers extra conversions at a lower incremental cost. I’ve seen similar logic in Blueprint practice exams where they focus on improving cost per conversion. Official guide covers budget allocation and CPA strategy if you need more detail. If anyone disagrees let me know.