Google Ads Quality Score is a diagnostic metric that rates the quality and relevance of your keywords, ads, and landing pages on a 1-to-10 scale, directly influencing your cost per click and ad position. In 2026, Quality Score still controls how much you pay for every click and whether your ads show at all. It is calculated from three components: expected click-through rate (CTR), ad relevance, and landing page experience. If you want to improve your Google Ads Quality Score, you need to understand how each component works, what moves the needle, and how to maintain high scores at scale without burning out your team.
This guide breaks down every component, explains exactly how Quality Score affects your CPC and ad position, and gives you a step-by-step playbook for fixing below-average scores across your Search campaigns.
Google has gradually downplayed Quality Score in its public messaging, pushing advertisers toward automated bidding and broader targeting. But the underlying auction mechanics have not changed. Quality Score remains the single most important lever between what you bid and what you actually pay.
Quality Score is composed of three sub-ratings, each scored as "Below Average," "Average," or "Above Average":
Expected CTR measures how likely your ad is to be clicked when shown for a given keyword, compared to other advertisers competing on the same query. This is normalized for ad position, meaning it isolates the quality of your ad from your bid.
Ad Relevance measures how closely your ad matches the intent behind the keyword. This is not just about keyword stuffing. It is about whether your ad meaningfully addresses what the searcher is looking for.
Landing Page Experience measures the quality, relevance, and usability of the page users land on after clicking. Google evaluates content relevance, page speed, mobile experience, and navigability.
Each component contributes to your overall 1-to-10 score. A keyword with "Above Average" across all three will typically score 7 or higher, while "Below Average" on even one component can drag you to 4 or below.
Google's ad auction does not simply award the top position to the highest bidder. Your Ad Rank is determined by your bid multiplied by your Quality Score (plus the expected impact of extensions and other ad formats). This means an advertiser with a Quality Score of 8 and a $3 bid outranks an advertiser with a Quality Score of 4 and a $5 bid.
The CPC impact is equally significant. You only pay enough to beat the Ad Rank of the advertiser below you. A higher Quality Score means you need a lower bid to maintain the same position. In practice, improving Quality Score from 5 to 8 on a keyword can reduce your CPC substantially, without any change in bidding strategy.
This is why Quality Score optimization should come before bidding strategy changes in your optimization priority list. No amount of smart bidding will compensate for poor Quality Scores.
A Quality Score of 4 does not just mean your ads are slightly less efficient. It means you are paying a premium on every single click compared to competitors with higher scores on the same keywords. Over thousands of clicks per month, this "Quality Score tax" compounds into significant wasted spend.
Worse, low Quality Scores reduce your impression share. Google is less likely to show your ads at all when your Quality Score is poor, even if your bids are competitive. You lose both efficiency and volume simultaneously.
For high-CPC verticals like legal or medical, where a single click can cost $50 or more, even a one-point Quality Score improvement translates directly to meaningful budget savings.
Expected CTR is the most misunderstood Quality Score component because advertisers confuse it with their actual click-through rate. They are related but not identical.
Google's expected CTR calculation normalizes for ad position, meaning it estimates what your CTR would be regardless of where your ad shows. An ad in position 1 naturally gets more clicks than one in position 4, so Google adjusts for this before evaluating quality.
The calculation also accounts for the specific keyword, not just the ad. Two ads in the same ad group can generate different expected CTR ratings depending on which keyword triggered them. This is keyword-level assessment, not ad-level.
Google factors in historical performance on the exact keyword across all advertisers, the relationship between the keyword and the ad shown, and device type. The result is a prediction of whether your ad will perform above, at, or below the average for that keyword.
Improving expected CTR comes down to writing ads that compel clicks relative to what competitors are showing. Several patterns consistently work:
Specificity over generality. Ads that include specific numbers, pricing, timeframes, or outcomes outperform vague benefit statements. "Get A Quote In 60 Seconds" outperforms "Fast And Easy Quotes."
Query mirroring in headlines. When the searcher's exact query appears in Headline 1, expected CTR improves because the ad reads as a direct answer to their search.
Strong CTAs with low friction. "See Pricing" or "Get Your Free Audit" outperform "Learn More" because they promise immediate value.
Differentiation from competitors. If every ad in the SERP says "Best Service, Great Prices," the ad that takes a different angle stands out. Examine what competitors are running and deliberately diverge.
Broad match keywords often carry lower expected CTR ratings because they trigger on a wider range of queries, many of which may be tangentially related. When your ad shows for a loosely related query, users are less likely to click, and Google's expected CTR model reflects this.
This does not mean you should avoid broad match. It means your negative keyword strategy must be robust enough to filter irrelevant queries before they drag down your expected CTR. Phrase match and exact match keywords typically carry higher expected CTR ratings because the query-to-ad alignment is tighter by default.
Ad relevance measures whether your ad directly addresses the intent behind the triggering keyword. This is the component most directly under your control, and it is the fastest to fix.
The most impactful thing you can do for ad relevance is ensure tight keyword-to-ad group alignment. When an ad group contains 30 loosely related keywords all served by the same two RSAs, ad relevance suffers across the board.
The fix is straightforward but labor-intensive: break your keywords into tightly themed ad groups where every keyword in the group shares the same core intent, and write ads specifically for that intent. This is not a new concept, but it remains the single biggest lever for ad relevance improvement.
For accounts with hundreds or thousands of keywords, this restructuring work is exactly the kind of ongoing optimization that separates well-managed accounts from neglected ones. It is also the kind of work that agencies and freelancers frequently skip because it takes significant time and does not produce immediately visible results. groas handles this through AI agents that continuously evaluate keyword-to-ad alignment across your entire account, with a dedicated human account manager ensuring the restructuring aligns with your broader business strategy.
Dynamic keyword insertion (DKI) can boost ad relevance by automatically placing the triggering keyword into your ad. But poorly implemented DKI creates awkward, ungrammatical ads that hurt expected CTR while helping ad relevance.
Use DKI selectively. It works best in headlines for tightly themed ad groups where every keyword reads naturally as a headline. Avoid DKI in descriptions, where the surrounding copy needs to flow as a complete sentence. Always set a sensible default text for cases where the keyword is too long or does not fit grammatically.
Google's responsive search ads combine up to 15 headlines and 4 descriptions in various combinations. Without pinning, Google may serve headline combinations that do not include your most relevant keyword-matched headline, tanking ad relevance.
A balanced pinning strategy pins your primary keyword-relevant headline to Position 1, pins a strong CTA to Position 2 or 3, and leaves the remaining positions unpinned so Google can test combinations. This ensures every ad impression includes at least one highly relevant headline without completely restricting Google's optimization.
Landing page experience is the Quality Score component that most advertisers treat as an afterthought, yet it carries significant weight and is the hardest to fake.
Google evaluates landing pages using a combination of signals. Content relevance measures whether the page content directly relates to the keyword and ad that brought the user there. If your ad promises "enterprise CRM software" and the landing page is a generic homepage, relevance suffers.
Transparency and trustworthiness include factors like clear contact information, privacy policies, and honest presentation of your product or service. Navigation ease evaluates whether users can find what they need quickly.
Core Web Vitals directly influence landing page experience scores. Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) should be under 2.5 seconds. First Input Delay should be under 100 milliseconds. Cumulative Layout Shift should be under 0.1.
Mobile experience is evaluated separately from desktop. Given that the majority of searches now happen on mobile, a page that performs well on desktop but poorly on mobile will still receive a below-average landing page experience rating for most keywords.
Content relevance is evaluated at the keyword level. A landing page about "project management software" might score well for the keyword "project management tool" but poorly for "team collaboration platform," even if both keywords point to the same page. This is why dedicated landing pages for major keyword themes outperform catch-all pages.
Within Google Ads, you can segment your keywords by landing page experience status. Filter for "Below Average" and group by landing page URL. This reveals which specific pages are hurting your Quality Scores.
Cross-reference this data with Google PageSpeed Insights and your analytics bounce rate data. Pages with high bounce rates and slow load times are almost certainly dragging down landing page experience scores.
One of the most common landing page experience killers is message mismatch. Your ad promises a specific offer, feature, or benefit, but the landing page either buries it below the fold or does not mention it at all. The fix is ensuring that the primary headline and above-the-fold content on your landing page directly echo the promise made in the ad.
Quality Score in Search campaigns works exactly as described above and remains the primary arena where it matters. Every keyword in your Search campaigns carries a visible Quality Score that directly influences your CPC and ad position.
Performance Max campaigns do not display keyword-level Quality Scores because they do not use traditional keyword targeting. However, the underlying quality signals still exist. Google evaluates ad creative quality, landing page experience, and relevance when deciding how to serve your Performance Max ads.
You cannot see or directly optimize a Quality Score number in Performance Max campaigns, but the same principles apply. Strong creative, relevant landing pages, and high engagement signals all improve how frequently and efficiently your PMax ads are served.
Remarketing lists for search ads (RLSA) allow you to bid differently on users who have already visited your site. These users typically have higher click-through rates and engagement, which positively influences Quality Score signals over time. However, RLSA does not receive a separate Quality Score. The keyword-level score is shared across all audiences. Using RLSA effectively improves your overall keyword performance metrics, which indirectly supports higher Quality Scores.
Start by downloading your keyword report with Quality Score columns enabled, including the three sub-component columns. Calculate the distribution: what percentage of your keywords are at 7 or above, what percentage are between 4 and 6, and what percentage are at 3 or below? This gives you a baseline and tells you how large the problem is.
Filter for keywords where any of the three components shows "Below Average." Sort by spend or impressions to prioritize high-volume keywords first. A keyword with 10 impressions per month and below-average ad relevance is a low priority. A keyword with 5,000 impressions per month and the same rating is costing you real money.
Ad relevance fixes are faster and cheaper to implement than landing page changes. Restructure ad groups around tighter keyword themes. Write new RSA headlines that directly incorporate the core terms from each ad group. Pin your most relevant headline to Position 1.
This single step often moves ad relevance from "Below Average" to "Average" or better within one to two weeks of accruing impression data.
Address page speed issues first, as these are binary improvements that help every keyword pointing to that page. Then ensure content relevance by matching above-the-fold content to the keyword themes driving traffic. Consider building dedicated landing pages for your top 10 to 20 keyword themes rather than sending all traffic to your homepage.
Quality Score is not a set-it-and-forget-it metric. Competitor behavior changes, search query patterns shift, and Google continuously re-evaluates your scores. What earned you "Above Average" six months ago may not hold today.
This is where ongoing management becomes essential. Monitoring Quality Score distribution across hundreds or thousands of keywords, identifying when components slip, and executing fixes before performance degrades requires consistent, daily attention.
Quality Score updates as Google accumulates new impression and click data. For high-volume keywords, scores can shift within days. For low-volume keywords, changes may take weeks. The problem is that most agencies and freelancers review accounts on a weekly or biweekly schedule, meaning Quality Score degradation often goes unnoticed for days or weeks. By the time it is caught, you have already overpaid on potentially thousands of clicks.
As we covered in our comparison of agencies, freelancers, and autonomous management, the frequency of optimization directly impacts performance. A human team that checks in a few times per week simply cannot match the responsiveness needed to catch Quality Score shifts in real time.
groas is built for exactly this kind of continuous, granular optimization. AI agents monitor Quality Score components across every keyword in your account 24/7, flagging the moment any component drops and automatically identifying the root cause, whether that is an ad relevance issue from a new keyword variant, a landing page speed regression, or a competitive shift affecting expected CTR.
Your dedicated human account manager at groas reviews these signals in the context of your overall strategy, ensuring that fixes are prioritized by business impact rather than just metric movement. On your bi-weekly strategy calls, your manager walks you through Quality Score trends alongside conversion data and CPC changes, so you see the full picture of how quality improvements translate to bottom-line results.
This combination of always-on AI execution and human strategic oversight is what makes groas fundamentally different from any agency, freelancer, or self-serve tool. You do not log into a dashboard and interpret recommendations. You do not wait for your account manager to have time to look at your Quality Scores. groas does the work, continuously, and your dedicated manager ensures it is all pointed in the right direction.
Quality Score optimization is not glamorous work, but it is the foundation that determines whether you pay $3 or $5 per click on the same keyword. Every point matters. Every component matters. And the accounts that maintain high Quality Scores consistently are the ones with management that never stops optimizing.
If your Quality Scores are stuck at average or below, and your current agency or freelancer has not made them a priority, it is worth asking why. groas treats Quality Score as a core operational metric, not an afterthought. The result is lower CPCs, better ad positions, and more efficient spend across your entire account.
A Quality Score of 7 or above is generally considered good. Keywords scoring 7 to 10 typically have "Above Average" ratings on at least two of the three components (expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing page experience). Keywords scoring 4 to 6 are average and represent optimization opportunities. Keywords at 3 or below are actively costing you extra on every click and should be prioritized for immediate fixes. The goal is to get the majority of your high-spend keywords to 7 or above.
It depends on the component you are fixing and your keyword volume. Ad relevance improvements, such as restructuring ad groups and writing tighter RSAs, can move scores within one to two weeks once Google accrues enough impression data. Landing page experience changes may take longer because Google recrawls and re-evaluates pages on its own schedule. Expected CTR improvements depend on accumulating enough click data to demonstrate a statistically meaningful change. High-volume keywords respond faster than low-volume ones.
Yes. Smart Bidding strategies like Target CPA and Target ROAS still operate within Google's ad auction, where Ad Rank is influenced by Quality Score. A higher Quality Score means Smart Bidding can achieve the same results with lower bids, or better results at the same bids. Improving Quality Score before or alongside adjusting your bidding strategy gives the algorithm more room to work efficiently.
No. Performance Max campaigns do not display keyword-level Quality Scores because they do not use traditional keyword targeting. However, the same quality signals (creative quality, landing page experience, and relevance) still influence how Google serves your PMax ads and at what cost. You should still optimize landing pages and creative quality for Performance Max, even though you cannot see a numeric score.
Your actual CTR and your expected CTR rating are different things. Google normalizes expected CTR for ad position, meaning it evaluates what your CTR would be if position were removed as a variable. You could have a decent raw CTR simply because you are bidding high enough to appear in top positions. Additionally, ad relevance and landing page experience are evaluated independently. A keyword can have strong expected CTR but still receive a low overall Quality Score due to poor ad relevance or a weak landing page.
Scaling Quality Score optimization requires continuous monitoring and systematic restructuring that most teams struggle to maintain. groas handles this through AI agents that monitor Quality Score components across every keyword in your account 24/7, automatically flagging drops and identifying root causes. Your dedicated human account manager prioritizes fixes by business impact, so the highest-spend, lowest-scoring keywords get attention first. This is exactly the kind of always-on, granular work that separates consistently high-performing accounts from those that slowly degrade.
They work together, but Quality Score should be addressed first. A strong bidding strategy on top of poor Quality Scores is like putting premium fuel in a car with a clogged engine. You are paying more per click than necessary, reducing the efficiency of every dollar your bidding strategy allocates. Fix Quality Score to lower your baseline CPC, then optimize your bidding strategy to maximize conversions at that lower cost. groas treats Quality Score as a core operational metric and optimizes it continuously alongside bidding, ensuring both work in concert for the best possible results.
Not exactly. Quality Score is calculated at the keyword level, not the ad level. When you update your RSAs, Google re-evaluates how the new ads perform against each keyword over time. The keyword retains its historical Quality Score until enough new data accumulates. Improved ad copy that lifts expected CTR and ad relevance will gradually pull the keyword's Quality Score up, but there is no instant reset. This is why continuous testing and iteration matters more than one-time ad refreshes.
