RKG Logo 434-970-1010

As a core component of paid search quality score, a strong Click-Through Rate (CTR) is vital for ensuring lower costs per click and higher ad visibility.  If you are seeing your CTR decline over months or years it can be concerning, but not necessarily an indication of a problem with your copy or PPC program as a whole.

Compared to other data points, CTR is a relatively unreliable metric for judging the health of a paid search program over time because there are so many factors that need to be accounted for, some of which the advertiser has little to no control over.

If you’re worried about how your CTR looks month to month or year over year and are considering widespread copy changes, here are some factors to consider first:

Search Network Expansion:

For many, traffic from the engines’ search networks is growing faster than traffic on the engines themselves.  Click-through rates on this partner traffic also tend to be significantly lower,  by as much as 50-90%.  If you were to make no changes to how your ads were syndicated, you would see a lower CTR just from the expansion of the search network.  The upside is that the lower network CTR should not affect your quality score on the core domain.  As Google states: CTR on the Google Network only ever impacts Quality Score on the Google Network — not on Google.

So, if the network traffic is otherwise performing well, no changes are necessary, but its effect on overall CTR should be noted during trend analysis.  To get a more consistent view of your CTR over time, parse out the network traffic in the engines’ reporting tools.

Competitive Landscape Changes:

An ad’s position on the search results page has a major impact on its click-through rate for obvious reasons.  As Google’s Fred Vallaeys succinctly puts it: An ad in a higher position is predisposed to get a better CTR. If a high-bidding competitor swoops in and bumps you down a spot, you are virtually guaranteed to see your CTR fall.

If you are bidding based on efficiency and not position, as RKG recommends, you are left to accept the lower position or work to improve your quality score or conversion metric to try to overtake the competitor.  Copy or landing page changes could help, but if you’ve already optimized in those areas, you may be better off working to grow the program where there is a greater potential return on your sweat equity.  With any luck, the competitor will find they are overspending and you’ll see your position and CTR improve when they reduce their bids.

Note that Google’s Quality Score is normalized to account for the expected click-through rate differences in different positions, so all else being equal, falling a spot due to changes in the competitive landscape should not hurt QS.

Broad Match Expansion:

The engines, particularly Google, are regularly tweaking how their broad match algorithms function.  This requires them to balance ad relevance and revenue, but in recent years, the short-term revenue side has been winning out.  A broader and broader definition of broad match leads to keywords showing for more distantly related search queries and click-through rate suffers as a result.

The upside again is that Google is smart enough to take this into account when determining Quality Score, which is based only on the performance of the keyword when it matches the search query exactly.  (Consequently, changing a keyword’s match type from broad to exact will not improve its Quality Score.)  So, seeing a lower CTR due to increased broad matching is not a great reason to make copy or match type changes in and of itself.  At the same time though, this scenario may indicate that your account could use negative or tail keyword additions (with better targeted copy and landing pages) or increased parsing of exact and broad match traffic, assuming the broad match traffic converts at a lower rate.

Ideally, in our analysis we would account for the wider scope of broad match by looking only at CTR data when the search query matched the keyword exactly, regardless of the keyword’s match type.  Unfortunately, that’s not an easy task at adgroup or higher levels unless you are running mirror campaigns under different match types.  Even then, there may still be some bleed over.

Other Considerations:

  • Portfolio effects: If you are frequently making keyword additions and bid changes, you may see your high level CTR stats improve or decline based on the type of keywords that receive more or less traffic after the changes.  In other words, click-through rate trends at an account, campaign or even adgroup level may not be telling you what you think they are.  For instance, growing incremental traffic while maintaining target efficiency is the goal for most advertisers, but it will lead to a lower account CTR as brand traffic with its higher click-through rates will make up a smaller proportion of the program.  Make sure to use as fine a level of detail as necessary to get an apples to apples comparison over time.
  • Efficiency target changes: Aiming for a different ROI is likely to result in changes to your average ad positions and your CTR will change as a result.
  • Content:  Impressions from contextual ads can fluctuate wildly, so content traffic should be parsed from search traffic by all means.

For an indication of what advertisers are up against, here’s a chart of RKG’s observed year over year change in Google Search impressions for a basket of well established clients versus the Y/Y change for Google Sites traffic under Comscore’s Core Search Report:

Even though we are taking regular steps to reduce poor quality broad match traffic, we have still seen our Adwords impressions balloon faster than clicks and much faster than traffic to Google and its partners as represented by the Comscore figures.  We’ve heard others recently ascribe lower CTRs to changes in consumer behavior during a weakened economic environment, but that would seem to be a minor effect relative to the changes coming from the engines.

Bottom line, if you are generating more traffic at the same efficiency despite lower click-through rates, chances are your program and copy are still in decent shape.  That’s not to say you should ignore the CTR metric, just be sure you know what the data is really saying before you change your optimization priorities.  Ideally,  PPC advertisers would have access to a more precise reading on quality score to steer by, but we’ll have to make do with what we have now.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , ,

If you like this post, consider subscribing to our RSS feed. You can also have new posts sent to you via email.


Related Posts

    No related posts.

Comments

  1. Cory Grassell, March 19, 2010:

    What are your thoughts on stats that suggest consumers are more apt to click on organic search results than PPC results? As a writer, I’d place more emphasis, time and energy on optimizing a site organically. I’m not discrediting the power and effectiveness of PPC advertising, but declining click-through rates don’t mean other areas of your online marketing aren’t working. You could still be generating traffic, which is what I think you meant in your statement, “Bottom line, if you are generating more traffic at the same efficiency despite lower click-through rates, chances are your program and copy are still in decent shape.”

  2. Mark Ballard, March 19, 2010:

    Cory,
    I don’t see this as an SEO v. PPC issue. The core of my argument is that CTRs are lower primarily due to misleading growth in impressions brought on by search network and broad match expansion by the engines. In other words, I don’t see organic click traffic growing faster than PPC click traffic, it’s just that PPC ads are increasingly likely to be shown on less relevant phrases and lower quality partner sites.

    I’m sure you’re right that organic links get the lion’s share of traffic on the whole, but for individual sites, PPC can often play the dominant role. Even in those cases, it’s still important to manage SEO well for a number of reasons including potential benefits for PPC like higher Quality Score.

    My “bottom line” above is referring only to PPC traffic. All I meant is that if you want a quick gauge of whether a CTR decline is meaningful, check click traffic levels first.

Your Comment

Trackback

http://www.rimmkaufman.com/rkgblog/2010/03/09/perils-of-ppc-click-through-rate-analysis/trackback/

Blogs Citing This Post

  1. Pingback: SearchCap: The Day In Search, March 9, 2010 on March 9, 2010
  2. Pingback: Perils of PPC Click-Through Rate Analysis | ItsSEO.com on March 12, 2010
  3. Pingback: PPC News Roundup for 3/12/2010 | The Adventures of PPC Hero on March 12, 2010
  4. Pingback: Article Marketing Tips And Advice on April 4, 2010
  5. Pingback: links for 2010-05-25 | Glenn Friesen on May 26, 2010

Email Updates

Categories

Recent Comments

  • George Michie: Thanks Adam, and your point is well taken. It is certainly worth pointing out that when the pendulum swings back to the middle the...
  • Adam Audette: Brilliant post, George. There’s something to be said for the ‘middle way’ to be sure, for dedication to what works...
  • George Michie: Billy, I’ve been predicting the death of Twitter for a long time. I try to keep those predictions to myself though, because I...
  • George Michie: Use the force, Luke, use the force! :-)
  • Siddharth Shah: Hi George, The paper chose books for a few reasons. This is what they say in the paper ” By focusing on books, we study a...
  • George Michie: Chad, thanks for the observations! Sid, the paper sounds interesting. I only read the abstract, but I wonder if they studied type of...
  • billy wolt: Hi George, this is the reason i have avoided twitter….the mob will move away soon. drop me an email, i want to pick your brain...
  • Siddharth Shah: Hi George, Your comment on retail reminded me of this paper I read a few months ago that investigated the online to offline...
  • Chad Summerhill: Hi George, sometime in my early 20’s I decided that if the mob was following something or doing something that I would be...
  • Chad Summerhill: No worries, I wouldn’t tell me either. But I’ve never been shy about asking smart people questions–has made a...
  • George Michie: Thanks Chad, I’ll answer these questions gladly…as soon as you come to work for us! :-) No question that the historical...
  • Chad Summerhill: Great post! Looks like I’ve got some work to do. Willing to share more about your bid-management predictive analytics?...
  • Chad Summerhill: Hi George, I would be honored. I’ll email you soon and we can talk about the details of the article. Thanks!
  • George Michie: Hi Chad, thanks for the link! If you’re willing to share the details I’d be delighted to do a feature at RKG Blog.
  • Chad Summerhill: Since I mentioned our in-house web analytics data warehouse earlier in the comments, I thought I would include a link to my new...

Blog Stats

  • Posts: 991
  • Words: 481,301
  • Comments: 3,360

Administration