ClickEquations Blog

A Serious Look at Paid Search Marketing Strategies, Tactics & Tools

Match Types & Quality Score – The Truth At Last

In the comments to the previous post on Modified Broad Match, Helena Papirnikova asked an interesting question regarding the role of match type in quality score.

This is an issue that has been clouded in confusion for some time, and I thought worth more discussion than just a comment reply. So here goes…

Match Type / Quality Scores Rumors

Many say that using more exact match within your campaigns is a way to boost quality scores. Others point out that match type has no impact at all on quality score.

Who’s right?

It turns out that the truth is somewhere in between. Quality score is only calculated when the search query is identical to the keyword. A broad match keyword like ‘dog food’ is matched to many different search queries – sometimes it’s matched to ‘dog food’ and sometimes to ‘cheap dog food’ and other times to ‘puppy chow on sale in Kansas City’.

But quality score is only calculated in those instances where the query is ‘dog food’. For all other queries, the quality score that was calculated when the query was ‘dog food’ is used.

Suppose you have a text ad that promotes low prices and free shipping. When the query ‘cheap dog food’ is matched to your ‘dog food’ broad match keyword, you actually get higher click-through-rates then you do when the query is simply ‘dog food’. But since the query ‘cheap dog food’ isn’t identical to the keyword ‘dog food’, a quality score is not calculated using this higher CTR. Instead, the quality score calculated based on the lower ‘dog food’ queries is applied.

The result is that your ad will appear less frequently, in lower positions, and at a higher CPC when the query is ‘cheap dog food’ and the keyword is ‘dog food’ then it would if you were buying the keyword ‘cheap dog food’ in either broad or phrase match type.

Match Type / Quality Score Facts

  • Match type plays a role in determining which queries will be matched to which keywords
  • Quality score is only calculated when the query is identical to the keyword, regardless of the keyword match type.
  • The match type of a keyword is not considered and has no effect on the calculation of quality score for any keyword.
  • When the search query is identical to the keyword, a quality score is calculated and applied. When a search query is not identical to the keyword (but matched anyway) the keyword will use a quality score that was calculated based on the performance of earlier searches where the query was identical to the keyword.
  • If the same keyword appears in an account using different match types each should earn a nearly identical quality score. (Note: Minor differences in quality score may occur due to differences in ad copy and target URLs and the geography of searchers.)

So more exact match does not improve quality score – at all. The match type you set for any keyword is irrelevant. What matters is the keywords you choose to include in your account.

The Secret To Better Quality Scores

When you add a keyword to your account and use a broad or phrase match type, you attract queries that are related or similar to your keyword, but quality score is not calculated for these queries. When the CTR of those queries is lower than that of the identical query, you get an undeserved boost. When the CTR of those queries is higher than that of the identical query, you pay a quality score price.

The logic behind the suggestion to use more exact match is probably sound, but it suggests the wrong way to achieve the objective. You don’t need more exact match keywords, you need more keywords that are identical to the search queries that perform well (or occur frequently) in your account.

This shows the importance of intelligent keyword expansion. The match types of your keywords should be set to whatever is appropriate for each keyword – see our ‘Match Type Keyword Trap’ and ‘Modified Broad Match’ posts for more details on effectively applying match types.

Broad match keywords, particularly those which are generic or broad terminology terms, will tend to get lower CTRs on the queries that are identical to them and higher CTRs for the longer and more precise phrases to which they’ll match. Broad match helps you find more searchers but it does so inefficiently from a quality score perspective.

It’s critical to ‘query mine’ the keywords in your account (as discussed in this blog post) to find valuable search queries and turn them into new keywords. THIS is how you improve quality score, and increase both search volume and impression share while increasing ROI. (BTW, the Keyword Zoom tool in ClickEquations is the best way in the world to get this done quickly and easily.)

Negatives Don’t Matter Either

This is probably a good place to correct another common rumor. Adding negative keywords doesn’t directly impact quality score either. The reason is the same. When negatives filter out queries that weren’t identical to the purchased keyword, it has no effect because quality score was never calculated for those queries anyway.

This isn’t to say you shouldn’t add all appropriate negatives – just that doing so won’t improve your quality score on specific keywords.

There is an indirect benefit, however. Adding negatives in theory will improve your CTRs overall (by not showing ads to people who probably shouldn’t be interested in them) and these improved CTRs may be used in the way CTR is considered for account history, display URL, and specific geographies – each of which is applied in the overall quality score calculation.

Why It Works This Way

The relationship between match types, keywords, search queries, and quality score is a little confusing. Why does it work this way? Why doesn’t AdWords just calculate quality score for every query?

I can only speculate. I seems like if we earned quality scores based on the performance of all the crazy search queries that broad and even phrase is sometimes matched to then we’d be less in control of our own accounts than with the current method of only judging our quality when people are searching for exactly what we’re advertising (on a keyword level).

I also believe that broadly quality score is a tool Google uses to get advertisers to do the right thing. Expanding keyword purchases based on queries is the right thing to do – it improves the account in every way and would be a best practice even if quality score didn’t exist. Yet I expect that if fully understood the benefits to quality score will motivate many people who wouldn’t otherwise make the effort frequently enough.

Quality score is a rating of how effective you are at advertising on a specific keyword. By only making that judgment based on the results of people who searched with a query that was identical to your keyword AdWords is able to fully and fairly score your performance.

Lessons Learned

When you look at the quality score of any keyword in your account, remember that this is the quality score earned by the identical queries. For broad match and phrase match keywords, there are likely queries getting this quality score – and the resulting Ad Rank and CPC – that could do better if you turn those queries into their own new keywords. Adding an exact match version of an existing keyword won’t help. Making productive queries into independent keywords can help a lot.

UPDATE: Good discussion in comments below, and I’ve heard from Google that ‘something’ is not correct above – will update here as soon as I know what. Happy to get corrected share the facts!

  • Chad Summerhill

    Fantastic post, Craig! I really appreciate you taking the time to create such great content. I always learn something on this blog.rnrnYou know Iu2019m a fan of your Keyword Zoom tool, but for your readers who donu2019t have the privilege of using your software Iu2019ve included a link to the beginning of an Advanced Search Query Mining Series that I just started over at the WordStream blog. The methods I will be teaching will require some AdWords reports and Excel–something everyone should have access to.rnrnhttp://www.wordstream.com/blog/ws/2010/11/10/advanced-search-query-miningrnrnAnd also another great post by Alan Mitchell on the use of Broad Match for query mining:rnrnhttp://www.calculatemarketing.com/blog/techniques/google-adwords-broad-match-generator/rnrnThanks again!rnrnChad

  • http://www.seowebjunction.com SEO Philippines

    Now this is a very good explanation on how QS and match type work together Craig. Another reason I can think of why Google have QS to work this way is so that there’s no easy of playing the system. And I totally agree with this statement, “Quality score is a rating of how effective you are at advertising on a specific keyword.”

  • http://richardfergie.com Richard Fergie

    There was quite a bit of discussion about this in the comments of http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2010/09/28/negative-keywords-do-not-affect-google-adwords-quality-score/nnI contacted my Google rep for clarification on some of the issues raised there. Their reply said that for broad match keywords QS is determined on queries which phrase match the query. So in your example “cheap dog food” would influence the QS.nnCan’t say I have any experimental evidence to back this up so it could just be a case of misunderstanding or crossed wires.nn

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Thanks Richard – Nowhere was ‘the devil is in the details’ more true than in Quality Score! nnI’ll dig through all the comments at RimmKaufman and try to get some other official info on your point and others made there. My experience is that many ‘Google Reps’ are often interpreting things and make statements not based on fact. Worth investigating and I will and will post an update as soon as I can find something out.

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Richard Fergie adds an interesting question and report of Google info below, and points to a very worthwhile thread at RimmKaufman. Pending further investigation, I’ll say that I do not believe that these ‘phrase match’ queries are used in any calculations. I’ve talked about this subject enough times with senior folks on the ads quality team to think the chances are slim that this subtlety was missed – but I’ll check it out.nnAlso, if you read the RimmKaufman post, I still am not convinced that the CTR impact of non-identical queries does not impact lifetime CTR of the account or of display URLS. I should have a definitive answer on that very soon.nnI guess it’s worth disclosing that I’m working on (and have for some time) a book on Quality Score and Google has agreed to cooperate in terms of providing access to ‘people who know’ and some of the top related folks to answer questions and confirm facts. This is why I say with some confidence that I can get definitive answers to these items. They’ve been great about it and claim they want the truth to come out – all this discussion really helps me to ask the right questions and get the full story. – Thanks everyone.

  • Chad Summerhill

    Hi Craig,rnrnHow would you explain the following scenario that’s happening in my account?rnrnI have my ad-groups split-out by match type and have for quite sometime now and in order to get AdWords to serve my exact match ad for the exact search query I use negative keywords in my broad match ad-group to force the ad to serve properly and prevent ad-poaching. Here is what Iu2019m seeing in my account for one of these high-volume terms represented as u2018dog foodu2019 below. I only have one high-volume term in each ad-group.rnrnAdGroup = DOG FOOD_ExactrnKeyword = [dog food] rnCTR = 3.96%, QS = 4/10 (this low QS is OK because I get a 54% conversion rate)rnrnAdGroup = DOG FOOD_BroadrnKeyword = dog food rn[-dog food] (exact match negative)rnCTR = 1.16%, QS = 6/10rnrnSo, in my broad match ad-group I have the exact search query set as an exact match negative keyword. Meaning that the broad match term is never matched to the exact search query. I checked my SQR to confirm this. The search query dog food never shows up in the broad match ad-group.rnrnHow are they calculating my QS? And why would my broad match keyword have a higher QS?rn

  • http://internetkapitaene.de/ Martin Roettgerding

    Hey Craig,rnrnyou asked on twitter why I thought you might not be serious with this post. I think all the conclusions would be right, but the premise is wrong: “Quality score is only calculated when the search query is identical to the keyword.”rnrnI find it hard to argue with this premise as there are no sources given. But looking at the consequences you outlined, it seems very wrong.rnrnLet me explain with a more dramatic example. Let’s say your keyword is “dog” (phrase match) and your quality score for that exact search query is through the roof. But for the search query “dog food” your ad performance is very bad, abysmal. Now if you don’t have the keyword “dog food” in your account, Google would have to rely on the great QS for the exact match even for the query “dog food”. For you this means a big, undeserved boost. But what would this mean for Google? The boost might lead to your ad being number one for the phrase “dog food”, even though the ad performs badly. The top spot would be given away to an ad that makes little money for Google. If that spot would’ve been given to another advertiser who actually gets higher CTR’s, Google would earn a lot more.rnrnThe bottom line is this: If your premise were true, Google would be making less money. Or, as Google would put it: the users would get worse search results, the advertisers would be treated unfairly and Google would be unhappy that both users and advertisers are unhappy. Whichever way you put it, this would not be a good way for Google to handle quality scores. That is why I strongly believe that they would never do it this way.rnrnThat Quality Score is only being calculated for the exact match query has often been said about the visible score on the adwords interface. I’ve never heard that in connection with the actual quality score. The official version is that quality score is calculated every time an ad is eligible to be displayed for a search query (see http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&answer=49174, first sentence). According to the AdWords help pages, one factor in determining quality score is “The relevance of the keyword and the matched ad to the search query” (same page as above). This includes the actual query. If only the exact match query was used for calculation, this would become “The relevance of the keyword and the matched ad to the keyword”.rnrnMy guess is that this post is based on a misunderstanding. Someone on the chain from the actual Google QS engineers over some Google reps to you has mixed up actual QS and ‘visible QS’ (to use a term you coined :) rnrnSo longrnrnMartin (@bloomarty)

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Martin – thanks for the detailed explanation of your view. I’m afraid a full reply would be longer than appropriate for comments, but let me try to convey my thoughts briefly.nnI’m 99.99% sure I’m exactly right within the scope and language of the post, based on direct conversations with the most senior and experienced members of the Google Ads Quality Team and management. I assure you these sources, who I’ll name if/when they give me permission but would be recognizable. However, I have some more discussions upcoming with them and I will attempt to get specific confirmation and clarification.nnI think your correct citation of the role of the search query in the determination of relevance is confused with the conversation here on click-through-rate. In other words the query can influence the relevance ‘score’ for that instance of the keyword being considered in an auction, but the quality score used for ad rank and CPC calculation will use the QS from the identical queries. nnYour point here and even the explanation I suggest does bring up some interesting questions and I’ll pursue them. nnI think the other confusing factor (to all of us) is that there isn’t one quality score – as you cite there is visible and the one behind the curtains, and there are many components behind the curtains that are often publicly referred to as quality score. I have a whole chapter in the upcoming book about this very issue. But I do not believe that the root point of this discussion – the fact that identical queries only are used in the calc of quality score – is incorrect. Again, I will verify in as much depth and clarity as possible and report back in the near future.nnThanks for the tweet and comment!nn

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Hm. Hard to explain that. Obvious idea would be landing page issues or relevance, I assume both are ‘OK’? Will try to find out and report back.

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Hm. Hard to explain that. Obvious idea would be landing page issues or relevance, I assume both are ‘OK’? Will try to find out and report back.

  • http://www.internetkapitaene.de Martin Roettgerding

    Craig, thanks for your reply. You mention a separate relevance score for a keyword being considered in an auction which is an interesting idea. I would’ve thought that if you’re eligible for an auction, that’s it. Then it all goes into one quality score for the minimum bid and, if needed, the one for the auction itself. Guess I’ll have to mull that over ;-) rnrnStill, I think I’m right: If you take CTR from exact matches you get suboptimal ad positions. However, no need to go in circles… I would love to hear what Google says about that.

  • Martin

    Could it be that these ad groups have different ads? Or maybe the same ads but multiple ads each and Google opted for different winners?

  • Christian Waijers

    Is there any news about the ‘true’ calculation of QS? I subscribe to Martin’s remarks about how exact (or phrase match, whichever it actually is) as criteria for QS calculation would seriously impact the way the system works and does not make much sense to me.nnDid you get an update from a Google authority on this?nnGreat that you are really trying to push Google into finally providing us with some more facts though!

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Google and I have missed each other several times over the past week, but we’re scheduled to try to talk again early next week. Hopefully the mystery will be solved soon.

  • http://twitter.com/ludvik Ludvik Hu00f8egh-Krohn

    Hi Chad!nnThis post is definitely one of the top AdWords articles this year! Great work!nnHave you had any success in getting more information from google? Especially whether QS is calculated from exact or phrase match queries!nnLudvik

  • http://twitter.com/trovatten Frederik Trovatten

    Hi Chad,nnHas Google confirmed your statement:n”When the CTR of those queries is lower than that of the identical query, you get an undeserved boost. When the CTR of those queries is higher than that of the identical query, you pay a quality score price.”nnIf yes, then that’s a huge game-change, especially regarding the mining of CTR data etc..

  • Jrod

    Hello, nnI’m very curious, any update from Google?

  • http://clickequations.com Craig Danuloff

    Not yet. We’re scheduled to talk later this week. I will post an update as soon as I have it.

  • http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/ Matthew Mierzejewski

    I thought I’d jump into the discussion, since the RKG post was referenced :) nnWe did find a new AdWords Help Center page, that appeared after our post went live, and I assume this post as well: http://adwords.google.com/support/aw/bin/answer.py?hl=en&lev=+topic&cbid=xro0z0hlwy6k&answer=68095&src=cbnn“Q: Does my choice of match type impact my Quality Score?nA: Match type does not directly impact Quality Score.”nnAlso, as my post title gives away, negative keywords do not have any direct effects on QS either.nCraig, looking forward to any updates from Google on this popular post!

Some of Our Clients

  • Comcast
  • Clix Marketing
  • Beau-coup
  • Uncommon Goods
  • Gyro:HSR
  • Portent Interactive
Get Adobe Flash player