Quality Score in Google Ads: what it is (and what it isn’t)
Quality Score is a 1–10 diagnostic rating shown at the keyword level in Search campaigns. Think of it as a quick health check that tells you how your keyword-and-ad experience compares to other advertisers competing for the same searches, not a number you “optimize” directly.
The most important nuance (and one many advertisers miss) is that the 1–10 Quality Score you see in the interface is not used at auction time to set your Ad Rank. Instead, it’s an aggregated, historical estimate that helps you spot where your user experience is weaker than the market.
The three components that drive Quality Score
Quality Score is built from three component statuses, each labeled Above average, Average, or Below average: expected clickthrough rate (how likely your ad is to be clicked when shown), ad relevance (how closely your ad matches the intent behind the search), and landing page experience (how relevant and useful your page is after the click).
In practice, these components are what you should manage to—because these same themes (CTR, relevance, and landing-page usefulness) are core to overall ad quality and strongly influence whether you can earn strong visibility without overpaying.
Why “chasing 10/10” is usually the wrong goal
I’ve managed accounts where pushing a few keywords from 7 to 9 made little business difference, and others where fixing a “Below average” landing page experience on high-volume terms unlocked scale immediately. The point is to use Quality Score like a warning light: prioritize it when it’s pointing to a real constraint on your ability to buy profitable traffic, and ignore it when it’s a distraction from ROI.
The real importance of Quality Score: how it affects performance and ROI
Even though Quality Score itself isn’t plugged into the live auction, it still matters because it summarizes the same quality forces that determine whether you can compete efficiently. When your ads and landing pages are more useful and relevant to the query, you typically earn stronger positions, better clickthrough rates, and more stable performance—often without needing to “brute force” your way in with higher bids.
Visibility: eligibility, positioning, and the ability to clear thresholds
Your ads don’t just “rank”; they must also meet minimum thresholds to appear in certain positions. When quality signals are weak, you can run into situations where you’re eligible only in lower placements, or where visibility is inconsistent even with aggressive bids. Improving relevance and user experience tends to make eligibility and positioning more predictable—especially on competitive, high-intent searches.
Cost efficiency: paying less for the same opportunity (or buying more with the same budget)
In Search, the price you pay per click is shaped by the competitive landscape and your Ad Rank dynamics. Higher ad quality is one of the few levers that can improve outcomes on both sides of the equation: it can help you win better placements while keeping cost-per-click pressure under control.
This is why Quality Score is ultimately an ROI topic. If you can raise clickthrough rate and conversion rate through relevance and landing-page alignment, you’re improving the “value per impression” and “value per click,” which compounds over time through smarter spend allocation and better auction performance.
A practical reality: assets can lift Ad Rank even if Quality Score doesn’t change
Advertisers are sometimes confused when they add more assets (like sitelinks, callouts, images, etc.) and see performance improve—but their visible Quality Score barely moves. That can be normal. Assets can increase prominence and expected performance in the live auction, while the diagnostic Quality Score remains primarily a keyword-level view centered on expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing page experience.
How to improve Quality Score (the right way): diagnose first, then fix the constraint
The fastest path to better Quality Score is not “more tweaks.” It’s a simple loop: identify which component is holding a keyword back, decide whether the keyword is worth fixing based on business value, then apply the improvement that directly targets that constraint.
Step 1: pull the right columns (including historical) so you can see patterns
Start by adding the Quality Score column plus the three component columns. Then add the historical versions as well, so you can tell whether changes you made actually moved the needle over time. If you’re serious about optimization, segmenting by day while reviewing these historical fields can help you separate real improvement from normal volatility.
- Add columns for Quality Score, Expected CTR, Ad Relevance, Landing Page Experience.
- Add historical versions of those fields for the date range you’re analyzing.
- Focus your review on keywords with meaningful impressions/spend (not the long tail).
If you see a dash instead of a score, don’t panic or “fix” anything blindly—often it simply indicates there isn’t enough exact-search volume to calculate a reliable diagnostic score for that keyword yet.
Step 2: treat the lowest component as the “constraint” (and fix that first)
When only one component is below average, you’ll usually get the best return by fixing that one thing rather than making broad changes everywhere. When two or three components are below average, that’s typically a sign your keyword-to-ad-to-landing-page alignment is fundamentally off, and you should consider restructuring rather than patching.
If Expected CTR is below average: earn the click with clearer intent matching
Expected CTR is heavily influenced by whether your ad looks like the best answer on the page for that specific search intent. The common mistake is trying to “write better ads” without tightening the intent. In my experience, the quickest CTR improvements come from aligning one ad group to one theme and making the promise in the ad unmistakably specific.
Use language that mirrors how people search, and make sure your headlines speak directly to the query’s goal (price, availability, location, “same day,” “near me,” “book online,” “quote,” etc.). If you’re using broad matching, be especially disciplined with search term reviews and negatives so your ads stop showing on lookalike intent that drags down CTR.
If Ad Relevance is below average: simplify your themes and stop forcing mismatches
Ad relevance problems usually come from ad groups that are too mixed. When one ad group tries to cover multiple products, audiences, or intents, your ad inevitably becomes generic—and generic ads lose to specific ads in competitive auctions.
The fix is structural: split ad groups so each one has a tight theme, then write ads that repeatedly reinforce that theme in headlines and descriptions. You’ll often see ad relevance improve simply by reducing the number of distinct intents each ad group is responsible for.
If Landing Page Experience is below average: make the post-click experience match the promise
Landing page experience is where many accounts quietly bleed ROI. Even with a strong ad, if the page is slow, hard to navigate on mobile, vague about what you offer, or disconnected from the keyword’s intent, your results will cap out.
Focus on alignment and usefulness first: the page should immediately confirm the offer from the ad, use the same language as the search intent, and make the next step obvious (call, form, purchase, book, etc.). Then tighten friction points that commonly erode performance, such as cluttered layouts, unclear pricing/requirements, thin content, or a weak above-the-fold section that forces users to hunt for relevance.
Step 3: prioritize improvements where they change business outcomes, not just a score
Quality Score work is most valuable when it’s applied to keywords that can scale profitable conversions: high-intent, high-volume terms where you’re losing visibility or paying more than you should. For everything else, use Quality Score as a directional signal, but make your decisions based on conversion rate, cost per acquisition (or return on ad spend), and impression share constraints.
Done correctly, improving Quality Score isn’t “score optimization.” It’s user-experience optimization that tends to produce the outcomes advertisers actually care about: better visibility, steadier volume, and stronger ROI at the same (or lower) cost.
Let AI handle
the Google Ads grunt work
Let AI handle
the Google Ads grunt work
Quality Score matters in Google Ads because it acts as a practical “health check” for how well your keywords, ads, and landing pages match what people are searching for; while the visible 1–10 score isn’t the number used directly in the live auction, it summarizes the same quality signals that influence Ad Rank, visibility, and how efficiently you can win clicks. The most useful way to work with it is to diagnose which component is holding you back—expected CTR, ad relevance, or landing page experience—and fix the biggest constraint on your important, high-intent terms instead of chasing a perfect 10/10. If you want help turning those diagnostics into a focused action plan, Blobr connects to your Google Ads account and uses specialized AI agents to continuously spot relevance gaps, wasted spend, and landing page mismatches, then suggests clear, prioritized improvements you can apply while staying fully in control.
Quality Score in Google Ads: what it is (and what it isn’t)
Quality Score is a 1–10 diagnostic rating shown at the keyword level in Search campaigns. Think of it as a quick health check that tells you how your keyword-and-ad experience compares to other advertisers competing for the same searches, not a number you “optimize” directly.
The most important nuance (and one many advertisers miss) is that the 1–10 Quality Score you see in the interface is not used at auction time to set your Ad Rank. Instead, it’s an aggregated, historical estimate that helps you spot where your user experience is weaker than the market.
The three components that drive Quality Score
Quality Score is built from three component statuses, each labeled Above average, Average, or Below average: expected clickthrough rate (how likely your ad is to be clicked when shown), ad relevance (how closely your ad matches the intent behind the search), and landing page experience (how relevant and useful your page is after the click).
In practice, these components are what you should manage to—because these same themes (CTR, relevance, and landing-page usefulness) are core to overall ad quality and strongly influence whether you can earn strong visibility without overpaying.
Why “chasing 10/10” is usually the wrong goal
I’ve managed accounts where pushing a few keywords from 7 to 9 made little business difference, and others where fixing a “Below average” landing page experience on high-volume terms unlocked scale immediately. The point is to use Quality Score like a warning light: prioritize it when it’s pointing to a real constraint on your ability to buy profitable traffic, and ignore it when it’s a distraction from ROI.
The real importance of Quality Score: how it affects performance and ROI
Even though Quality Score itself isn’t plugged into the live auction, it still matters because it summarizes the same quality forces that determine whether you can compete efficiently. When your ads and landing pages are more useful and relevant to the query, you typically earn stronger positions, better clickthrough rates, and more stable performance—often without needing to “brute force” your way in with higher bids.
Visibility: eligibility, positioning, and the ability to clear thresholds
Your ads don’t just “rank”; they must also meet minimum thresholds to appear in certain positions. When quality signals are weak, you can run into situations where you’re eligible only in lower placements, or where visibility is inconsistent even with aggressive bids. Improving relevance and user experience tends to make eligibility and positioning more predictable—especially on competitive, high-intent searches.
Cost efficiency: paying less for the same opportunity (or buying more with the same budget)
In Search, the price you pay per click is shaped by the competitive landscape and your Ad Rank dynamics. Higher ad quality is one of the few levers that can improve outcomes on both sides of the equation: it can help you win better placements while keeping cost-per-click pressure under control.
This is why Quality Score is ultimately an ROI topic. If you can raise clickthrough rate and conversion rate through relevance and landing-page alignment, you’re improving the “value per impression” and “value per click,” which compounds over time through smarter spend allocation and better auction performance.
A practical reality: assets can lift Ad Rank even if Quality Score doesn’t change
Advertisers are sometimes confused when they add more assets (like sitelinks, callouts, images, etc.) and see performance improve—but their visible Quality Score barely moves. That can be normal. Assets can increase prominence and expected performance in the live auction, while the diagnostic Quality Score remains primarily a keyword-level view centered on expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing page experience.
How to improve Quality Score (the right way): diagnose first, then fix the constraint
The fastest path to better Quality Score is not “more tweaks.” It’s a simple loop: identify which component is holding a keyword back, decide whether the keyword is worth fixing based on business value, then apply the improvement that directly targets that constraint.
Step 1: pull the right columns (including historical) so you can see patterns
Start by adding the Quality Score column plus the three component columns. Then add the historical versions as well, so you can tell whether changes you made actually moved the needle over time. If you’re serious about optimization, segmenting by day while reviewing these historical fields can help you separate real improvement from normal volatility.
- Add columns for Quality Score, Expected CTR, Ad Relevance, Landing Page Experience.
- Add historical versions of those fields for the date range you’re analyzing.
- Focus your review on keywords with meaningful impressions/spend (not the long tail).
If you see a dash instead of a score, don’t panic or “fix” anything blindly—often it simply indicates there isn’t enough exact-search volume to calculate a reliable diagnostic score for that keyword yet.
Step 2: treat the lowest component as the “constraint” (and fix that first)
When only one component is below average, you’ll usually get the best return by fixing that one thing rather than making broad changes everywhere. When two or three components are below average, that’s typically a sign your keyword-to-ad-to-landing-page alignment is fundamentally off, and you should consider restructuring rather than patching.
If Expected CTR is below average: earn the click with clearer intent matching
Expected CTR is heavily influenced by whether your ad looks like the best answer on the page for that specific search intent. The common mistake is trying to “write better ads” without tightening the intent. In my experience, the quickest CTR improvements come from aligning one ad group to one theme and making the promise in the ad unmistakably specific.
Use language that mirrors how people search, and make sure your headlines speak directly to the query’s goal (price, availability, location, “same day,” “near me,” “book online,” “quote,” etc.). If you’re using broad matching, be especially disciplined with search term reviews and negatives so your ads stop showing on lookalike intent that drags down CTR.
If Ad Relevance is below average: simplify your themes and stop forcing mismatches
Ad relevance problems usually come from ad groups that are too mixed. When one ad group tries to cover multiple products, audiences, or intents, your ad inevitably becomes generic—and generic ads lose to specific ads in competitive auctions.
The fix is structural: split ad groups so each one has a tight theme, then write ads that repeatedly reinforce that theme in headlines and descriptions. You’ll often see ad relevance improve simply by reducing the number of distinct intents each ad group is responsible for.
If Landing Page Experience is below average: make the post-click experience match the promise
Landing page experience is where many accounts quietly bleed ROI. Even with a strong ad, if the page is slow, hard to navigate on mobile, vague about what you offer, or disconnected from the keyword’s intent, your results will cap out.
Focus on alignment and usefulness first: the page should immediately confirm the offer from the ad, use the same language as the search intent, and make the next step obvious (call, form, purchase, book, etc.). Then tighten friction points that commonly erode performance, such as cluttered layouts, unclear pricing/requirements, thin content, or a weak above-the-fold section that forces users to hunt for relevance.
Step 3: prioritize improvements where they change business outcomes, not just a score
Quality Score work is most valuable when it’s applied to keywords that can scale profitable conversions: high-intent, high-volume terms where you’re losing visibility or paying more than you should. For everything else, use Quality Score as a directional signal, but make your decisions based on conversion rate, cost per acquisition (or return on ad spend), and impression share constraints.
Done correctly, improving Quality Score isn’t “score optimization.” It’s user-experience optimization that tends to produce the outcomes advertisers actually care about: better visibility, steadier volume, and stronger ROI at the same (or lower) cost.
