Quality Score: What It Is (and What It Isn’t)
Quality Score in Google Ads is a keyword-level diagnostic score (1–10) designed to help you understand how your Search ads’ user experience compares to other advertisers competing for the same keyword. It’s built from three components: expected click-through rate (expected CTR), ad relevance, and landing page experience. Each component is graded as Above average, Average, or Below average based on recent performance history and comparisons against competitors showing for the exact same keyword.
The most important mindset shift is this: Quality Score is a diagnostic, not a KPI. You don’t “optimize the number” directly—you improve the underlying user experience that the number summarizes. Also, Quality Score itself isn’t used as a direct input in the ad auction. Auction-time ad quality is more contextual and can vary by query, device, location, time, and ad format signals, even when the keyword’s 1–10 score looks unchanged.
That said, improving the three Quality Score components tends to improve real outcomes that do matter: eligibility to show, position potential, and efficiency (often lower cost per click for the same competitiveness). If you treat Quality Score as a spotlight for where the experience is weakest, it becomes one of the fastest ways to find and fix wasted spend.
One nuance that trips up even experienced advertisers
Quality Score is rooted in historical impressions for exact searches of your keyword over a recent window, so “quick fixes” like changing match types don’t reliably move the score by themselves. If you see a dash (“—”) instead of a score, it usually means there isn’t enough exact-search volume to calculate it yet—so the right move is to focus on performance and structure, not force a number that doesn’t have sufficient data behind it.
Diagnose Before You Optimize: A Simple Quality Score Workflow
When advertisers struggle with Quality Score, it’s rarely because they need a clever trick. It’s almost always because one component is clearly signaling “the user experience here is weaker than what competitors are delivering.” Your job is to identify which component is dragging the keyword down and fix that specific experience.
Set up your view (so you’re not guessing)
In the keywords view, add columns for Quality Score and the three component columns (expected CTR, ad relevance, landing page experience). Then add the historical versions of those same columns so you can see whether your changes are moving the needle over time. Segmenting by day is a practical way to spot when shifts started—especially if you recently changed ads, sent traffic to a new page, or updated the site.
The fastest diagnostic checklist
- Is the score missing (“—”)? If yes, you likely don’t have enough exact-search history. Optimize performance first; the score will become available when there’s sufficient data.
- Which component is Below average? That component is your priority. Don’t start by rewriting everything if only landing page experience is the issue.
- Is the keyword “high intent” but CTR is weak? That’s usually an offer/message mismatch, weak differentiation, or ads that are too generic for the query.
- Are users clicking but not engaging/converting? That often shows up as landing page experience challenges (expectation mismatch, speed, mobile usability, or unclear content).
Once you’ve identified the weak component, optimize for the user experience that component represents. The score improvement is the side effect; better traffic quality and lower waste are the payoff.
How to Boost Quality Score by Component (The Practical Playbook)
1) Expected CTR: Win the Click by Being More Compelling and More Specific
Expected CTR reflects how likely your ad is to be clicked when shown, normalized for context (including ad position). If expected CTR is Average or Below average, the fix is usually not “bid more.” It’s to make your ad a better answer to the search and a more attractive choice versus the other ads on the page.
Start by tightening the connection between keyword intent and ad promise. Your ad should make it obvious that you sell exactly what was searched and why your option is worth choosing. Stronger differentiation matters here: a unique benefit (like a clear perk, a concrete advantage, or a specific service attribute) can lift engagement because it gives users a reason to click your result instead of the next one.
Also, don’t underestimate clarity. Generic ads sometimes produce “okay” CTR, but they tend to underperform in auctions where competitors match intent more precisely. In many accounts, the biggest CTR gains come from being more specific in the ad text—even if that means fewer clicks—because the clicks you do earn are more qualified.
Expected CTR upgrades you can apply immediately
If your expected CTR status is not Above average, prioritize these improvements in your next ad iteration: make the offer more compelling for the target audience, ensure ad details match the intent behind the keyword, highlight a unique benefit (for example, a real differentiator users care about), test stronger calls to action (Buy, Order, Browse, Find, Sign up, Try, Get a Quote), and add specificity that pre-qualifies the click.
Use ad variety correctly (this is where many accounts underperform)
To raise expected CTR consistently, you need enough high-quality messaging options for the system to choose from in different contexts. A reliable best practice is to maintain multiple ads in each ad group so the system can serve the message most likely to perform for that auction’s query and user context. In practice, that means keeping a healthy rotation of distinct ads rather than minor variations of the same idea.
If you’re using responsive search ads, aim for “Good” or “Excellent” ad strength as a quality control habit during build and ongoing maintenance. Ad strength doesn’t directly control eligibility, but it’s a strong indicator that you’ve provided enough unique headline and description assets to compete across intents. Avoid repetitive assets, add genuinely different angles (benefits, proof, use cases, objections, urgency), and be cautious with heavy pinning because it reduces the combinations the system can test.
2) Ad Relevance: Align Keyword Intent, Ad Language, and the User’s “Job to Be Done”
Ad relevance is about how closely your ad matches the intent behind a user’s search. When this component is Average or Below average, the issue is usually structural: the keyword set inside the ad group represents multiple intents, but your ad can only speak clearly to one or two.
The fix is to tighten your keyword-to-ad relationship. Group keywords by theme and intent so that your ad text can naturally mirror the language users are searching with. When themes diverge—different product categories, different service types, different buyer stages—split them. This is one of the highest-leverage changes you can make because it improves relevance without needing more budget.
In ad writing, “relevance” doesn’t mean you must mechanically repeat the keyword. It means the user instantly recognizes that your ad is about what they searched, and the next step (the landing page) will deliver on it. Use the same vocabulary your customers use, and make sure your primary promise is the most likely reason that searcher is looking.
3) Landing Page Experience: Match Expectations, Improve Usability, and Remove Trust Friction
Landing page experience measures how relevant and useful your landing page is to people who click your ad. If this component is Average or Below average, you should assume one of three problems is happening: the page doesn’t deliver what the searcher expected, the page is difficult to use (especially on mobile), or the page creates trust concerns (unclear business details, vague claims, confusing pricing, or content that feels misleading).
Expectation match is the first lever. If someone searches for a product category and clicks an ad that promises that category, the landing page should prominently feature that inventory or that service—not a generic homepage that forces extra navigation. Consistent messaging from ad to page matters just as much: if the ad contains an offer, a key claim, or a specific call to action, the page should immediately support it so the click feels “confirmed,” not bait-and-switch.
From a measurement standpoint, conversion rate is a useful proxy when you’re improving landing page experience. It won’t directly change the landing page component label by itself, but in real accounts it’s often the quickest signal that you’re reducing friction and better satisfying intent.
Landing page upgrades that most often lift the “Landing page experience” component
Make the page mobile-friendly, because ease of navigation tends to matter even more on mobile devices. Improve loading speed, because speed is often the difference between a bounce and a buyer. Keep the experience straightforward: users should be able to immediately understand what you offer, confirm they’re in the right place, and take the next step without hunting.
Don’t ignore “trust basics” (they affect performance and can protect your account)
Even when the page is relevant and fast, unclear or misleading business information can create major friction for users—and can create compliance risk. Make sure your site clearly represents who you are, what you provide, and how a customer can contact you. Avoid vague identity signals, unclear pricing expectations, or claims that can’t be consistently supported. When in doubt, simplify the promise and strengthen the proof on-page (details, policies, clear contact information, and transparent explanations).
Modern Reality: Ad Quality Is Bigger Than the 1–10 Number
Advertisers often waste time chasing myths about Quality Score. Moving campaigns around without changing ads or landing pages won’t improve ad quality. Bidding higher can change position, but it doesn’t directly “fix” ad quality. And adding more ad assets can help your Ad Rank by improving how prominent and useful your ad appears, but you shouldn’t expect Quality Score to rise just because you added assets—the system separates the expected impact of assets from the expected CTR calculation used in Quality Score.
What does work is simple: make your keyword targeting more intentional, your ad messaging more relevant and compelling, and your landing page experience faster, clearer, and more trustworthy. If you do those three things consistently, Quality Score tends to rise over time as the account accumulates better history for the exact searches tied to each keyword.
A realistic improvement timeline (so you set expectations correctly)
Because the Quality Score components are based on recent historical performance and comparisons against other advertisers for the same keyword, improvements are rarely instant. The best pattern I’ve seen over 15+ years is to make focused changes (one component at a time), monitor the component labels daily/weekly alongside CTR and conversion metrics, and iterate. When advertisers do this with discipline—especially by tightening themes and upgrading landing page experience—they usually see more stable efficiency gains than any “hack” could ever deliver.
Let AI handle
the Google Ads grunt work
Let AI handle
the Google Ads grunt work
If you’re working to boost Quality Score in Google Ads, it helps to treat it as a diagnostic for the three levers that matter most—expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing page experience—then improve the real user experience behind each component (tighten keyword-to-ad intent, write clearer/more compelling RSAs, and send clicks to fast, message-matched pages). Blobr can support this kind of structured iteration by plugging into your Google Ads account and turning best practices into concrete, prioritized actions; for example, its Keyword Landing Optimizer can map high-value keywords to the most relevant landing pages and recommend cleaner ad group splits, while the Campaign Landing Page Optimizer can flag page-level edits that better align on-page messaging with your ads to improve relevance and conversion quality over time.
Quality Score: What It Is (and What It Isn’t)
Quality Score in Google Ads is a keyword-level diagnostic score (1–10) designed to help you understand how your Search ads’ user experience compares to other advertisers competing for the same keyword. It’s built from three components: expected click-through rate (expected CTR), ad relevance, and landing page experience. Each component is graded as Above average, Average, or Below average based on recent performance history and comparisons against competitors showing for the exact same keyword.
The most important mindset shift is this: Quality Score is a diagnostic, not a KPI. You don’t “optimize the number” directly—you improve the underlying user experience that the number summarizes. Also, Quality Score itself isn’t used as a direct input in the ad auction. Auction-time ad quality is more contextual and can vary by query, device, location, time, and ad format signals, even when the keyword’s 1–10 score looks unchanged.
That said, improving the three Quality Score components tends to improve real outcomes that do matter: eligibility to show, position potential, and efficiency (often lower cost per click for the same competitiveness). If you treat Quality Score as a spotlight for where the experience is weakest, it becomes one of the fastest ways to find and fix wasted spend.
One nuance that trips up even experienced advertisers
Quality Score is rooted in historical impressions for exact searches of your keyword over a recent window, so “quick fixes” like changing match types don’t reliably move the score by themselves. If you see a dash (“—”) instead of a score, it usually means there isn’t enough exact-search volume to calculate it yet—so the right move is to focus on performance and structure, not force a number that doesn’t have sufficient data behind it.
Diagnose Before You Optimize: A Simple Quality Score Workflow
When advertisers struggle with Quality Score, it’s rarely because they need a clever trick. It’s almost always because one component is clearly signaling “the user experience here is weaker than what competitors are delivering.” Your job is to identify which component is dragging the keyword down and fix that specific experience.
Set up your view (so you’re not guessing)
In the keywords view, add columns for Quality Score and the three component columns (expected CTR, ad relevance, landing page experience). Then add the historical versions of those same columns so you can see whether your changes are moving the needle over time. Segmenting by day is a practical way to spot when shifts started—especially if you recently changed ads, sent traffic to a new page, or updated the site.
The fastest diagnostic checklist
- Is the score missing (“—”)? If yes, you likely don’t have enough exact-search history. Optimize performance first; the score will become available when there’s sufficient data.
- Which component is Below average? That component is your priority. Don’t start by rewriting everything if only landing page experience is the issue.
- Is the keyword “high intent” but CTR is weak? That’s usually an offer/message mismatch, weak differentiation, or ads that are too generic for the query.
- Are users clicking but not engaging/converting? That often shows up as landing page experience challenges (expectation mismatch, speed, mobile usability, or unclear content).
Once you’ve identified the weak component, optimize for the user experience that component represents. The score improvement is the side effect; better traffic quality and lower waste are the payoff.
How to Boost Quality Score by Component (The Practical Playbook)
1) Expected CTR: Win the Click by Being More Compelling and More Specific
Expected CTR reflects how likely your ad is to be clicked when shown, normalized for context (including ad position). If expected CTR is Average or Below average, the fix is usually not “bid more.” It’s to make your ad a better answer to the search and a more attractive choice versus the other ads on the page.
Start by tightening the connection between keyword intent and ad promise. Your ad should make it obvious that you sell exactly what was searched and why your option is worth choosing. Stronger differentiation matters here: a unique benefit (like a clear perk, a concrete advantage, or a specific service attribute) can lift engagement because it gives users a reason to click your result instead of the next one.
Also, don’t underestimate clarity. Generic ads sometimes produce “okay” CTR, but they tend to underperform in auctions where competitors match intent more precisely. In many accounts, the biggest CTR gains come from being more specific in the ad text—even if that means fewer clicks—because the clicks you do earn are more qualified.
Expected CTR upgrades you can apply immediately
If your expected CTR status is not Above average, prioritize these improvements in your next ad iteration: make the offer more compelling for the target audience, ensure ad details match the intent behind the keyword, highlight a unique benefit (for example, a real differentiator users care about), test stronger calls to action (Buy, Order, Browse, Find, Sign up, Try, Get a Quote), and add specificity that pre-qualifies the click.
Use ad variety correctly (this is where many accounts underperform)
To raise expected CTR consistently, you need enough high-quality messaging options for the system to choose from in different contexts. A reliable best practice is to maintain multiple ads in each ad group so the system can serve the message most likely to perform for that auction’s query and user context. In practice, that means keeping a healthy rotation of distinct ads rather than minor variations of the same idea.
If you’re using responsive search ads, aim for “Good” or “Excellent” ad strength as a quality control habit during build and ongoing maintenance. Ad strength doesn’t directly control eligibility, but it’s a strong indicator that you’ve provided enough unique headline and description assets to compete across intents. Avoid repetitive assets, add genuinely different angles (benefits, proof, use cases, objections, urgency), and be cautious with heavy pinning because it reduces the combinations the system can test.
2) Ad Relevance: Align Keyword Intent, Ad Language, and the User’s “Job to Be Done”
Ad relevance is about how closely your ad matches the intent behind a user’s search. When this component is Average or Below average, the issue is usually structural: the keyword set inside the ad group represents multiple intents, but your ad can only speak clearly to one or two.
The fix is to tighten your keyword-to-ad relationship. Group keywords by theme and intent so that your ad text can naturally mirror the language users are searching with. When themes diverge—different product categories, different service types, different buyer stages—split them. This is one of the highest-leverage changes you can make because it improves relevance without needing more budget.
In ad writing, “relevance” doesn’t mean you must mechanically repeat the keyword. It means the user instantly recognizes that your ad is about what they searched, and the next step (the landing page) will deliver on it. Use the same vocabulary your customers use, and make sure your primary promise is the most likely reason that searcher is looking.
3) Landing Page Experience: Match Expectations, Improve Usability, and Remove Trust Friction
Landing page experience measures how relevant and useful your landing page is to people who click your ad. If this component is Average or Below average, you should assume one of three problems is happening: the page doesn’t deliver what the searcher expected, the page is difficult to use (especially on mobile), or the page creates trust concerns (unclear business details, vague claims, confusing pricing, or content that feels misleading).
Expectation match is the first lever. If someone searches for a product category and clicks an ad that promises that category, the landing page should prominently feature that inventory or that service—not a generic homepage that forces extra navigation. Consistent messaging from ad to page matters just as much: if the ad contains an offer, a key claim, or a specific call to action, the page should immediately support it so the click feels “confirmed,” not bait-and-switch.
From a measurement standpoint, conversion rate is a useful proxy when you’re improving landing page experience. It won’t directly change the landing page component label by itself, but in real accounts it’s often the quickest signal that you’re reducing friction and better satisfying intent.
Landing page upgrades that most often lift the “Landing page experience” component
Make the page mobile-friendly, because ease of navigation tends to matter even more on mobile devices. Improve loading speed, because speed is often the difference between a bounce and a buyer. Keep the experience straightforward: users should be able to immediately understand what you offer, confirm they’re in the right place, and take the next step without hunting.
Don’t ignore “trust basics” (they affect performance and can protect your account)
Even when the page is relevant and fast, unclear or misleading business information can create major friction for users—and can create compliance risk. Make sure your site clearly represents who you are, what you provide, and how a customer can contact you. Avoid vague identity signals, unclear pricing expectations, or claims that can’t be consistently supported. When in doubt, simplify the promise and strengthen the proof on-page (details, policies, clear contact information, and transparent explanations).
Modern Reality: Ad Quality Is Bigger Than the 1–10 Number
Advertisers often waste time chasing myths about Quality Score. Moving campaigns around without changing ads or landing pages won’t improve ad quality. Bidding higher can change position, but it doesn’t directly “fix” ad quality. And adding more ad assets can help your Ad Rank by improving how prominent and useful your ad appears, but you shouldn’t expect Quality Score to rise just because you added assets—the system separates the expected impact of assets from the expected CTR calculation used in Quality Score.
What does work is simple: make your keyword targeting more intentional, your ad messaging more relevant and compelling, and your landing page experience faster, clearer, and more trustworthy. If you do those three things consistently, Quality Score tends to rise over time as the account accumulates better history for the exact searches tied to each keyword.
A realistic improvement timeline (so you set expectations correctly)
Because the Quality Score components are based on recent historical performance and comparisons against other advertisers for the same keyword, improvements are rarely instant. The best pattern I’ve seen over 15+ years is to make focused changes (one component at a time), monitor the component labels daily/weekly alongside CTR and conversion metrics, and iterate. When advertisers do this with discipline—especially by tightening themes and upgrading landing page experience—they usually see more stable efficiency gains than any “hack” could ever deliver.
