How do I organize campaigns for multiple products?

Start with a structure that matches how you actually make money

Organize products by “business reality,” not by how your website menu looks

When you’re advertising multiple products, the cleanest Google Ads account structures are built around three things: who the products are for, what outcome you’re optimizing toward (lead, sale, subscription, store visit), and how different the economics are (price point, margin, conversion rate, LTV). If two products look different but behave the same commercially, they usually belong together for faster learning and simpler management. If two products look similar but have very different margins or conversion goals, they often deserve separation so budgets, targets, and messaging don’t fight each other.

A practical way to do this is to map every product into a small set of “product buckets” you can manage: for example, bestsellers, high-margin, entry-level, seasonal, and clearance. Those buckets become the foundation for campaign splits, bidding targets, and reporting slices—especially for feed-based formats like Shopping and Performance Max.

Use this simple decision rule: consolidate until you have a reason to split

In most accounts, too many campaigns is the #1 cause of slow learning, inconsistent performance, and messy reporting. I generally recommend starting consolidated, then splitting only when you can clearly explain what you’ll control differently (budget, geography, goal, creative, landing pages, or bidding targets).

• Keep products together when they share the same conversion goal, similar profitability, similar audience/intent, and you’d be comfortable with the system shifting spend between them.
• Split products out when they need different ROAS/CPA targets, different geo or language settings, different landing page experiences, or they require materially different messaging and sales objections.
• Split temporarily when you need clean testing (new pricing, new offer, new positioning) and you want a controlled budget during the test window.

Build your campaign layout by channel (Search vs. Shopping/Performance Max vs. Demand Gen)

For Search campaigns: separate by intent first, then by product

Search performs best when your structure mirrors how people search. Instead of creating one campaign per product by default, consider creating campaigns by intent layer and grouping products inside them where it makes sense. For example, you might have one campaign for “brand + product” searches, another for “category” searches, and another for “competitor/alternative” searches. Within each campaign, use ad groups (or tightly themed ad groups) to keep keywords, ads, and landing pages aligned to a specific product or product family.

This approach scales because you can add products without multiplying campaign settings chaos. It also keeps your reporting meaningful: you’ll know whether performance is being driven by brand demand, category demand, or competitor conquesting—rather than staring at 40 product campaigns that all look “fine” but don’t tell you what’s actually happening.

For Shopping campaigns: organize with product groups (your “bidding tree”)

Shopping campaigns don’t use keywords to decide what product shows; they use your product feed and your product group structure. When you first create a Shopping campaign, you start with a single product group called “All products,” and the best practice is to subdivide into smaller groups so you can bid and control more intelligently. You can subdivide product groups multiple levels deep (up to seven levels), and each ad group can support a large number of product groups (up to 5,000). The key is to stop subdividing where the products inside a group behave similarly, because bids are applied at the “leaf” product group level (you can’t set a bid on a product group that has been subdivided).

The most scalable subdivision strategies are usually category → product type → margin tier or brand → category → bestseller/seasonal. If you keep your feed consistently labeled, you’ll be able to restructure quickly as your catalog grows without rebuilding campaigns from scratch.

For Performance Max (with a Merchant Center feed): use asset groups + listing groups, and keep it simple

In Performance Max, listing groups sit inside each asset group and determine which products are eligible to show with that asset group’s creative theme. This is where many multi-product advertisers either overcomplicate things (thousands of tiny listing groups) or under-control things (everything in one bucket with generic creative). The sweet spot is to create asset groups that match meaningful product families or merchandising themes (for example: “Winter outerwear,” “Work shoes,” “Gift bundles”), then use listing groups to include the right products for each theme.

Listing groups can be subdivided using feed attributes such as category, brand, item ID, condition, product type, channel, and up to five custom labels. Each asset group can have up to 1,000 listing groups, and going beyond that level of granularity is generally not a best practice; performance can suffer when you create an overly complex tree. When you need strong control without an explosion of subdivisions, custom labels are the cleanest lever: group items in the feed, then target those labels in listing groups.

If you’re debating “one Performance Max campaign vs. many,” my bias is to run as few as you can while still honoring real differences in goals/settings. Multiple Performance Max campaigns can coexist without “competing” in the way people fear; the system will enter the best eligible ad into the auction. If you consolidate budgets from multiple Performance Max campaigns into one, do it gradually (a common safe approach is moving budget in steps week by week) so performance transitions smoothly and you can diagnose changes.

For Demand Gen with product feeds: think “catalog coverage” and clean segmentation

Demand Gen can use a Merchant Center feed as a product catalog, which is ideal when you have many products and don’t want to build ads one by one. In practice, this works best when you include enough eligible products for personalization—while still keeping the catalog relevant to the audience and creative angle of that ad group. While campaigns can run with as few as one product, performance and eligibility typically improve when you include multiple products; a practical floor is at least four eligible products, and larger catalogs often benefit from having dozens of products available for the system to learn from.

If you need to separate product sets cleanly, feed labels are a useful organizational tool because they let you advertise all products that share a label within a campaign (with one feed label selected per campaign). For more advanced control, product filtering rules matter: initial filtering tends to support one filter method with “OR” logic, while post-creation product group work allows you to add subdivisions/exclusions that effectively layer conditions (“AND” logic). This is a big deal for multi-product advertisers because it lets you start broad and then tighten control once you’ve validated performance.

Make multi-product management scalable: feed labeling, naming, budgets, and reporting

Use custom labels as your “multi-product control system”

If you sell multiple products, custom labels are one of the highest-ROI organization tools you can implement because they scale across Shopping, Performance Max listing groups, and reporting. You can assign up to five custom label attributes per product (custom label 0 through custom label 4). Use each label slot for a single consistent dimension, such as: margin tier, seasonality, lifecycle stage (new/core/clearance), bestseller status, or price band.

Two operational notes matter in real accounts. First, label values must be kept under control so reporting stays readable; each custom label attribute supports a limited set of unique values across the account. Second, feed changes don’t always appear instantly in Google Ads; it’s normal for new or edited custom labels to take a day or two before they show up for targeting and reporting. Plan launches and restructures with that delay in mind.

Group variants correctly so your structure doesn’t break as your catalog grows

For products that come in variants (sizes, colors, etc.), make sure you’re using item group identifiers in your feed so variants are understood as a family. This helps prevent messy duplication issues and makes your product segmentation more reliable as inventory changes. Clean variant grouping also makes it easier to build listing groups and product groups that reflect how customers shop (a “shoe model” with variants) rather than forcing you to manage every SKU as a separate strategic unit.

Use labels inside Google Ads to keep campaigns organized without constant rebuilds

Even with a great structure, multi-product accounts get messy fast unless you can filter and slice. Campaign/ad group/keyword labels are perfect for this because you can tag entities by product line, margin tier, funnel stage, or launch wave, then filter reporting tables instantly. This is especially useful when your structural “units” (campaigns and asset groups) are organized one way, but your leadership team wants reporting another way (for example: by brand category, or by merchandising collection).

Shared budgets and portfolio bidding: simplify spend control across related products

When multiple product campaigns share the same goal and you’re comfortable letting the system allocate budget dynamically, shared budgets can reduce daily budget micromanagement and improve utilization. This is particularly effective for clusters like “5 related product categories” or “multiple seasonal collections” where demand fluctuates week to week and you don’t want to keep shifting dollars manually.

For an additional layer of consistency, portfolio bid strategies let you apply one automated bidding strategy across multiple campaigns and evaluate performance at the portfolio level. This is a strong option when your products share a target CPA/ROAS philosophy and you want cleaner optimization across the group, rather than each campaign learning in isolation.

A naming convention that won’t collapse at 50+ products

Finally, set a naming system you can scale before things get big. A simple pattern like Network | Geo | Product bucket | Intent/Theme | Objective makes it easy to search, filter, and hand off management. For example, you’ll be able to instantly pull “US | Shopping | High-margin | Category A” without relying on tribal knowledge or opening every campaign.

If you want, tell me what you’re selling (ecommerce vs lead gen), roughly how many products/SKUs you have, and whether you’re running Search, Shopping, Performance Max, or Demand Gen today—then I can suggest a clean “starter structure” that you can grow into without a painful restructure later.

If you’re juggling multiple products in one Google Ads account, the goal is usually to keep structure aligned with “business reality” (who each product is for, what you’re optimizing for, and differences in margin/LTV) while avoiding over-splitting that slows learning; that often means consolidating where goals and economics match, separating Search by intent (brand vs category vs competitor), using feed custom labels as a reusable control layer across Shopping, Performance Max, and Demand Gen, and enforcing naming conventions so reporting stays workable as you scale. If you want a lightweight way to keep this kind of structure clean over time, Blobr connects to your Google Ads and runs specialized AI agents that continuously analyze campaigns and turn best practices into concrete recommendations—like tightening intent-based organization, improving landing page alignment, or refreshing ad assets—while you stay in control of what gets applied and where.