Google Ads launched Responsive Search ads (RSAs) in 2018. The goal was that you could just write several headlines and descriptions, and Google would figure out the best combination of lines to show to any user.
When they launched, there was a lot of speculation that Google would retire the current Expanded Text ads or that Google would fully automate your ad creation. While this sounded like a dream, the counterpoint was that if humans were removed from the ad creation process, the brand messaging would be lost as well as emotional connections and empathy as those are skills that computers lack.
We waited, collected data, and then examined them to see how they performed against ETAs.
In 2019, we compared expanded text ads to responsive search ads to see how each was doing across a large variety of accounts. The trend was very obvious:
Why do ETAs usually win in Conversion Rates? To answer this question, we first need to consider a few aspects of writing an effective ad.
A winning ad is usually comprised of a few ad elements:
In our previous analysis, we looked at the most common layouts of headline 2 & 3 to see what combinations worked best for companies, and we found that mixing a benefit and a CTA work the best for most search ads.
This is why we often suggest starting to test ETAs with these too overall formulas:
When most people created their responsive search ads, they didn’t think a lot about the end combinations and instead wrote a bunch of headlines hoping Google would figure out how to render your ad. This means there were ads that had:
If you see an ad that has these headlines, would you click it?
Unfortunately, some ads looked this way. As Google’s algorithm can only create Responsive Search Ads from the lines that you give it, if you give it poor ad line possibilities, the system won’t work well.
To create RSAs that can compete with ETAs, we need to think about the possible combinations and ensure the system has that ability.
If we want the ad to be relevant to the ad group, we need 2-3 lines that are related to the keywords in the ad group.
If we want users to take action, we need 2-3 calls to action.
If we want users to see the benefit of our product and service, we need 2-3 benefits.
If we want users to see the features of a product, we need 2-3 features.
FYI – benefits are more useful high in the funnel or the very bottom of it. Features are more useful as a user learns and compares products and services.
If you create 2 relevancy lines and 3 CTAs and 2 benefits, you will end up with some ads with 2-3 CTAs in them since there are more CTA lines than other ad lines. Therefore, we want to be consistent using the same number of CTAs, relevancy lines, and benefits or features.
Lastly, we need to think about data. If we create 3 relevancy lines, 3 benefits, 3 CTAs, and 3 feature lines, we have hundreds of combination possibilities. If you add a few descriptions to the headlines, then we quickly run into thousands of combinations. As most ad groups don’t get enough data to statistical significance in a single month, giving an ad group thousands of combinations will make it, so Google never figures out a great RSA combination for an ad group.
Therefore, if we use this straightforward list of combinations, we often find RSAs increasing in effectiveness over how they are currently structured.
The biggest problem advertiser’s run into is ensuring there are 3 lines related to the ad group to start. We will often see the exact same RSA in tens or hundreds of ad groups. When that happens, your ads become less effective. Search is about answering the searcher’s question by showing your ad is relevant and useful. If you use the same ad in hundreds of ad groups, your ads are rarely relevant, and your quality scores drop as well as your CTRs and conversion rates.
If you have relevant ads in all of your ad groups now, then you can use the Responsive Search ad creation tool within Adalysis to quickly create relevant RSAs in all of your ad groups.
Creating winning RSA combinations is quite simple. You need to go back to the basics of a great search text ad:
Many of your best ETAs use this ad writing formula.
As RSAs just combine the data you give it into multiple ad renderings. If you take that formula, expand it 2-3 times to come up with all your individual lines, and then put them into an RSA, your Responsive Search Ad has a chance of rendering into a very nice ad that the user will see, click on, and convert. When you give poor inputs, the ads become useless, and no one wants to see a useless ad. If you give your RSAs a nice combination of ad lines, then your RSA has the necessary inputs for Google Ads to find a great combination to show for your account.
Mike
Thanks for this article. Do you have thoughts on using element pinning to force Google to show your elements in the order you want?
Brad
If you are doing 2-3 pins, then you should just use ETAs since you can control everything.
The most common usage of pins is for appending something that legal requires to the h2/h3 or to pin the h1 to make sure the headline 1 is always related to the ad group. While pinning can be useful, at some point in time you’re taking so much ad control that you should switch to ETAs instead of RSAs.
