Ad Strength in Google Ads: Why Average is Better Than Excellent

If your most recent Google search campaign boasted all green bars and a high-fiving “Excellent” stamped in bold above your ad copy, congratulations… or condolences? 🧐

Because in the quietly turbulent world of Google Ads, where algorithms hum like Protestant work ethic machines and marketers chase optimization like alchemists searching for gold, an “Excellent” ad strength may just be the most charming form of sabotage. Like putting too much perfume on a letter—impressive to smell, unreadable to understand.

What Ad Strength Really Measures 🔍

The ad strength indicator in Google Ads, introduced primarily for Responsive Search Ads (RSAs), reflects how diverse and “optimized” your ad assets are in terms of quantity, uniqueness, and usage of keywords. Google assesses your headlines, descriptions, and their variations to dish out a label: Poor, Average, Good, or Excellent.

The prevailing wisdom is: the stronger the rating, the better the performance. After all, Google says so, and when has an algorithmic oracle ever steered us wrong?

“Excellent ad strength does not guarantee results,” the support documents whisper, like a cat knocking over a glass it didn’t claim to push.

A Brief Window into Irony: The Excellent Trap 📉

In theory, “Excellent” means your ad components check all the algorithm’s boxes: varied headlines, high keyword relevance, lots of options for Google AI to juggle like an over-caffeinated circus act.

But in practice, when ads become overly generalized to satisfy the almighty diversity meter, they often lose their clarity, coherence, and—most fatally—their click-through rate. They’re like robots trying to speak poetry: everything technically correct, nothing emotionally compelling. 🤖💔

A/B testing by performance marketing agencies such as Disruptive Advertising and KlientBoost has consistently shown that “Excellent” doesn’t always mean “high-performing.” In many test campaigns, ads graded “Average” had higher click-through rates (CTR) and better conversion performance than their supposedly “Excellent” counterparts.

If life were a Broadway musical, “Average” is the scrappy understudy who surprises the crowd with raw sincerity—while “Excellent” trips over its rhinestones trying to hit every note.

How Google Decides What’s Excellent—And Why That’s a Problem 🎯

So how is ad strength calculated? Largely via automation. Google’s machine scans for:

• Number of unique headlines and descriptions
• Keyword inclusion matching user intent
• Predictive adaptability across multiple audiences

While these elements support machine learning, they also dilute clarity. A brand selling luxury kitchen knives is now suggested to write a dozen vague, interchangeable headlines like “Cut Through the Competition” and “Make Cooking Effortless.” Strong metaphors, but lacking grounding. Where’s the steel? Where’s the edge?

“Relevance” becomes a parody of itself—language optimized for impression, not expression. The more inputs you offer Google’s learning robot, the more Frankensteinian your final ad becomes. Arms from Hemingway, legs from LinkedIn, a head that thinks in hashtags.

The Antithesis at the Core 🔀

And here’s the striking irony: a platform built on data suggests abandonment of human nuance. Those who’ve worked in paid search long enough know this paradox intimately: to serve many well, you must speak simply and clearly—to one at a time. You can either create an ad meant for an algorithm, or one meant for a person. Rarely both.

Consider the numbers. A recent internal study by digital agency Tier11 compared an “Excellent” RSA against an “Average” optimized Expanded Text Ad. The “Average” ad had a 40% higher conversion rate. Context beats compliance every time. 🧠📈

“Ad strength reminds me of wine scoring systems,” quips Alex Chan, a performance strategist. “A 90-point bottle can taste sterile. The 84-pointer from a backyard vineyard might change your summer.”

Learning from Mediocrity—Strategically

To be clear, no one is advocating mediocrity for art’s sake. Average does not mean lazy. It means selectively focused—tight, tailored, and strategically pruned. It’s a refusal of excess, an embrace of clarity.

The Power in Working Against the Machine ⚙️🧠

There’s something almost romantic in it: leaning into a machine’s blind spots. Creating an ad humans actually want to read, even if the artificial brain in Mountain View frowns upon it.

Unsurprisingly, as digital marketers become more self-aware of automation fatigue, we’re seeing a slow, deliberate rebellion. Higher-performing SEO titles, ad headlines, and search phrases are regaining their grit. There’s a return to handcraft—ads with rough edges and guts. Less glitter, more gravel. 🪨✨

In short, don’t conflate algorithmic compliance with strategy. Don’t drown your voice in a dozen synthetic headlines just because a dashboard told you green is good