5 Quality Score myths that are costing you marketing budget

The Quality Score remains one of the most discussed yet most misunderstood metrics in Google Ads. In 2026, many advertisers are still making budget decisions based on false assumptions about how this score works and what it actually influences. The result: unnecessarily high CPCs, missed auction opportunities, and wasted ad spend. This article exposes the five most damaging Quality Score myths and shows how AdBrains uses its own AI technology to tackle them structurally for clients including ToetsJeKennis.nl and Clima-Active.nl.

What is Quality Score and why does it matter?

Quality Score is a diagnostic metric from 1 to 10 that Google assigns to each keyword in your Google Ads account. It is calculated from three components: expected CTR, ad relevance to the keyword, and landing page experience. Google combines these three factors with your bid to determine Ad Rank, the position of your ad in the auction.

A higher Quality Score can, in principle, lead to a lower CPC and a better position, but the relationship is far more complex than most advertisers realise. That complexity creates fertile ground for myths that send well-intentioned marketers in the wrong direction. Below are the five myths that cause the most damage in practice.

Myth vs. Reality: Quality Score

What advertisers assume vs. how Google Ads actually works

Common assumptions

• Higher Quality Score = always lower CPC
• Quality Score 10/10 is always achievable and necessary
• Exact match always gives the highest Quality Score
• Quality Score directly improves CTR
• Low Quality Score = pause the campaign

What actually worksAdBrains Insight

• Quality Score is one factor in Ad Rank, not the only one
• A score of 7-8 is fine; 10/10 is rare and not required
• Ad relevance and landing page experience weigh more heavily
• CTR improves through strong RSA combinations, not score-chasing
• Low score requires analysis, not blind optimisation

The comparison above makes one thing immediately clear: reality diverges from common assumptions on almost every point. Let us examine each myth in depth.

Myth 1: A higher Quality Score always leads to a lower CPC

This is the most widespread myth. The idea is simple: higher Quality Score means lower costs. That is partially true, but the relationship is neither linear nor absolute. Your actual CPC is determined by the Ad Rank of the competitor directly below you, divided by your Quality Score, plus one cent. In other words, your CPC also depends heavily on what competitors are bidding and what Quality Score they have.

An advertiser with Quality Score 6 and a strong bid can comfortably outcompete someone with Quality Score 9 who bids low. Conversely, if a competitor with score 5 bids aggressively, your CPC can remain high even with score 8. Optimising your Quality Score is useful but partial. Focusing exclusively on raising the score without looking at the complete picture means missing opportunities.

For an e-commerce client like ToetsJeKennis.nl, which sells online courses and exams with an average order value of 50 euros, keeping CPC proportionate to margin is critical. Fixating on Quality Score while not securing the target ROAS in the bidding strategy leads to inefficiency. The score is a tool, not a holy grail.

Myth 2: A Quality Score of 10/10 is essential for success

Many advertisers see a Quality Score of 10/10 as the ultimate goal and invest disproportionate amounts of time chasing that perfect score. In reality, a score of 7 or 8 is entirely sufficient for a competitive advantage in most sectors. Score 10 is also rare and virtually exclusive to branded keywords where your brand, ad, and landing page are in perfect alignment.

For generic, commercial keywords, score 10 is nearly unachievable. Google evaluates expected CTR based on historical data from comparable advertisers in your sector. If nobody in your industry ever achieves a CTR of 15% on a competitive keyword, Google will never award the maximum score regardless of how good your ad is. The energy spent trying to push a score from 8 to 10 is better invested in improving conversion rates on the landing page, refining audiences, or expanding keyword structure.

Myth 3: Exact match keywords automatically give the highest Quality Score

Another persistent assumption is that exact match keywords inherently produce a higher Quality Score than broad match or phrase match variants. The logic seems sound: exact match is more precise, therefore more relevant, therefore higher score. But Google does not evaluate Quality Score based on match type alone. Expected CTR, ad relevance, and landing page experience are assessed independently of match type.

It is entirely possible for a broad match keyword to have a higher Quality Score than an exact match variant, simply because the broad match keyword has accumulated more historical click data, or because the ad group is better structured. Exact match gives you more control over which search queries trigger your ad, but that is a separate advantage from Quality Score improvement.

This also means that splitting keywords by match type does not automatically raise scores. The structure of your campaign, the quality of your ad copy, and the relevance of your landing page are far more determinative. If you want more control over search query management, search term mining is a more effective instrument than fragmenting your keyword structure.

Impact of Quality Score components on Ad Rank

Relative weight of the three components (industry indication)

Landing page experience

39%

Expected CTR

35%

Ad relevance

26%

As the data above shows, landing page experience carries the greatest weight in the final Quality Score calculation. This means that improvements to the landing page have a structurally greater effect than endlessly tweaking match types or ad copy. Expected CTR ranks second, followed by ad relevance. A balanced approach that addresses all three components is always more effective than optimising along just one dimension.

Myth 4: Quality Score directly improves your CTR

There is a popular line of reasoning: if your Quality Score rises, your CTR rises too. This is reverse causality. Expected CTR is an input to Quality Score, not an output. Your CTR improves by writing better ads, testing stronger calls-to-action, using ad extensions, and improving your Responsive Search Ads (RSA). When those improvements generate more clicks, your Quality Score subsequently rises, not the other way around.

Advertisers who expect a high Quality Score to automatically generate more clicks are therefore disappointed. A score of 9 on a dull, generic ad attracts fewer clicks than a score of 7 on an ad with a sharp USP, compelling price mentions, or urgency triggers. The score reflects quality but does not guarantee clicks.

For lead generation clients like Clima-Active.nl, which collects quote requests for air conditioning and heat pump installations, improving ad copy with concrete benefits such as "installation guarantee", "available next day", or "free consultation" significantly increases CTR. That improved CTR then feeds back into a higher Quality Score, but the action that creates the difference is the ad copy, not score optimisation itself.

Myth 5: A low Quality Score is reason to pause a campaign

Finally, the most drastic myth: a low Quality Score on a keyword or ad group is for some advertisers immediate cause to pause the campaign. In most cases, this is the wrong reflex. A low score is a signal, not a sentence. It tells you that something is misaligned between keyword, ad copy, and landing page, but the solution is improvement, not pausing.

Pausing a campaign based on a low Quality Score creates multiple disadvantages. First, you lose historical data that Google uses for Smart Bidding. The more data a campaign has, the better automated bidding strategies like Target CPA or Target ROAS can perform. Pausing effectively resets the learning period. Second, you miss conversions in the interim, causing direct revenue damage.

The correct approach to a low Quality Score is systematic analysis: which of the three components scores low? If landing page experience is weak, adjust the page for loading speed, relevance, and conversion elements. If ad relevance is the issue, rewrite ad copy so the keyword features more prominently. If expected CTR is the problem, test new headlines and descriptions in your RSAs. Only when a keyword is structurally irrelevant to your offering does pausing make sense, and in that case, removal is actually the better choice.

How AdBrains AI automates Quality Score improvement

AdBrains has built its own AI technology specifically to monitor and improve all three Quality Score components continuously and automatically, so clients structurally benefit from lower CPCs and better Ad Rank positions without manual intervention.

Our RSA improvement system analyses Ad Strength scores of all Responsive Search Ads across every account daily. When an ad has POOR or AVERAGE status, the system automatically triggers a rewriting process based on the best-performing headlines and descriptions in the account history, combined with the keywords in the relevant ad group. The result is that ad relevance and expected CTR are systematically improved, two of the three Quality Score components, without an account manager manually reviewing hundreds of ads.

For the third component, landing page experience, AdBrains deploys our AI quality score advisory system. Every ad group automatically receives concrete improvement recommendations based on a combined analysis of the landing page (loading speed, keyword density, content relevance) and the associated ad copy. These recommendations are immediately visible to the client in the AdBrains dashboard, prioritised by expected return on investment.

Our multi-agent verification system additionally oversees every automated optimisation decision. Four independent AI agents review each change before execution, preventing a quality improvement in one component from inadvertently harming another. This is a common mistake in manual management: adjusting ad copy for better relevance can lower CTR if the message becomes less compelling.

Finally, our server-side signal enrichment via our own sGTM infrastructure improves the quality of conversion signals sent to Google. Better conversion data means Smart Bidding is better informed about which search queries actually convert, indirectly contributing to a better expected CTR assessment by Google. Advertisers using server-side tracking see on average 23% more conversions tracked compared to browser-based tracking alone. For clients like E-4motion.com, the webshop for new electric folding bikes, every tracked conversion is crucial for optimally steering bidding strategies. The combined effect of these automated systems means Quality Score is not a metric AdBrains clients monitor retrospectively, but something actively and continuously improved as an integral part of campaign management.

Quality Score optimisation in practice

Average industry benchmarks for optimised Google Ads accounts

23%

lower CPC with Quality Score 7+ vs. 4-

31%

higher CTR with optimised RSA combinations

7-8

average Quality Score in well-managed accounts

40%

of budget wasted due to low Quality Score (poor accounts)

The benchmarks above illustrate what structural Quality Score optimisation can mean in practice. Accounts with a score of 7 or higher pay on average 23% less per click, while optimised RSA combinations can improve CTR by an average of 31%. In poorly managed accounts, up to 40% of ad budget is lost to low Quality Scores, money that with the right approach can immediately be spent more effectively.

Quality Score versus Ad Strength: what is the difference?

A frequently asked question is what distinguishes Quality Score from Ad Strength. These two metrics are regularly confused, but they measure fundamentally different things.

Both metrics are relevant for a well-performing Google Ads account, but they require different optimisation actions. High Ad Strength without good Quality Score produces attractive ads that are still too expensive in the auction. And high Quality Score with low Ad Strength means Google has too little variety to serve the best ad combination. Ideally, you optimise both in parallel.

Step-by-step Quality Score improvement checklist

• Diagnose by component: Check in Google Ads which of the three components (expected CTR, ad relevance, landing page experience) is rated Below average for each keyword.
• Improve landing page relevance: Ensure the primary keyword of the ad group appears prominently in the H1, meta title, and first paragraph of the landing page.
• Optimise loading speed: A slow landing page directly harms landing page experience. Aim for a load time below 2 seconds on mobile.
• Rewrite RSA combinations: Test at least 8 to 10 headlines per RSA and include the primary keyword in at least two headlines.
• Conduct structural search term mining: Irrelevant search terms generating clicks without conversions lower your historical CTR, which damages expected CTR assessment. Daily analysis and addition of negative keywords is essential.
• Create tightly themed ad groups: The sharper the thematic focus of an ad group, the better the alignment between keyword and ad.

Frequently asked questions about Quality Score

How often is Quality Score updated?

Google updates Quality Score continuously based on new auction data. The Google Ads interface shows a snapshot of the score, but in reality the score varies per auction based on context such as device, location, and time of day. The figures you see in the interface represent an average over recent periods. This means improvements to your ads and landing page can become visible quickly, sometimes within a few days to two weeks.

Does Quality Score affect Performance Max campaigns?

Performance Max (PMax) campaigns do not use the classic keyword-level Quality Score because PMax has no traditional keyword structure. PMax uses asset group performance and audience signals to optimise ads instead. However, the underlying quality of your landing pages and ad assets does influence how well PMax performs, it is simply not visible as Quality Score. For search campaigns, Quality Score remains the most direct metric to monitor.

Should I remove a keyword with a Quality Score of 1 or 2?

Not necessarily. First diagnose why the score is so low. A score of 1 or 2 on a new keyword can simply be the result of insufficient data. Google typically needs at least several dozen auction impressions to calculate a reliable score. If a keyword has already generated substantial traffic and the score remains low, systematic analysis of the three components is the right step. Only if after optimisation the score does not improve and the keyword generates few conversions is removal a serious option.

What is a good Quality Score benchmark for my industry?

As a rule of thumb: branded keywords typically score 8 to 10, generic commercial keywords 5 to 7, and competitive head terms 4 to 6. A score of 7 or higher on non-branded keywords indicates a well-optimised account. For lead generation sectors such as the installation industry where Clima-Active.nl operates, average scores of 6 to 7 on generic keywords represent a realistic and positive result with good account management. Always combine these benchmarks with actual campaign performance: a keyword with Quality Score 6 that converts profitably deserves more attention than a keyword with score 9 that never converts.