Quality Score remains the most powerful lever for reducing Google Ads costs in 2025—a score of 10 versus 5 cuts your cost-per-click by 50%, while a score of 1 inflates costs by 400%. Despite speculation about algorithmic changes, Google has made no announced modifications to Quality Score calculation in 2024-2025. The fundamentals still hold: Expected CTR and Landing Page Experience each carry 39% weighting, with Ad Relevance contributing 22%. For local service businesses, strategic optimization can slash lead costs from industry averages of $80-$144 down to half that figure.
How Quality Score is actually calculated
Google officially describes Quality Score as a “diagnostic tool” rather than a direct auction input, but its components directly mirror the real-time quality signals that determine Ad Rank. Research from SEISO analyzing 15,000+ Google Ads accounts reverse-engineered the scoring formula, revealing a point-based system where each component contributes differently.
The calculation follows this structure: a baseline of 1 point plus weighted contributions from each factor. Expected CTR and Landing Page Experience each add up to 3.5 points when rated “Above Average,” 1.75 points at “Average,” and 0 points when “Below Average.” Ad Relevance contributes half as much—2 points maximum. This means improving CTR or landing page performance has twice the impact of optimizing ad relevance alone.
Each component is evaluated by comparing your performance against other advertisers bidding on the exact same keyword over the previous 90 days. New keywords start at a baseline score of 6, and scores display as whole numbers from 1-10 in your account. A dash (“—”) appears when insufficient search volume exists to calculate a score.
The financial impact on your campaigns
The relationship between Quality Score and actual cost-per-click follows a predictable curve. One utility billing company documented $1.5 million in savings over six years after improving their impression-weighted Quality Score from 6.5 to 8.9—with the final year alone generating $632,000 in CPC discounts at a 465% ROAS.
| Quality Score | CPC Impact vs. Baseline (QS 5) |
| 10 | -50% (half price) |
| 8 | -37% |
| 7 | -28% |
| 6 | -17% |
| 5 | Baseline |
| 4 | +25% penalty |
| 3 | +67% penalty |
| 1 | +400% penalty |
WordStream’s analysis of 30,000 accounts found that each 1-point Quality Score increase correlates with a 16% decrease in cost per conversion. The actual CPC formula works as follows: your CPC equals the Ad Rank of the competitor below you divided by your Quality Score, plus $0.01. Higher Quality Scores mean you pay less to maintain the same position—or achieve higher positions at your current bid.
Landing page factors Google actually evaluates
Google’s landing page assessment combines automated crawling with user behavior signals. The core evaluation criteria fall into five categories: relevance to search intent, usefulness of content, navigation ease, business transparency, and loading speed. Each receives an “Above Average,” “Average,” or “Below Average” rating.
Core Web Vitals thresholds matter indirectly. While Google hasn’t confirmed Core Web Vitals as direct Quality Score inputs, page speed explicitly factors into landing page experience. The current thresholds are: LCP (Largest Contentful Paint) at ≤2.5 seconds, INP (Interaction to Next Paint) under 200ms, and CLS (Cumulative Layout Shift) below 0.1. Note that INP replaced First Input Delay in March 2024. Pages exceeding 3 seconds load time see 53% mobile abandonment, and each 1-second delay reduces conversions by approximately 7%.
Mobile optimization requirements have become non-negotiable. Google Ads tracks “Mobile-friendly click rate” in the Landing Pages report—you should target 100%. Touch targets need minimum 48×48 pixel dimensions, and intrusive interstitials actively harm your scores. The platform introduced a Mobile Speed Score (1-10) directly within Google Ads, making mobile performance visible without leaving your account.
Expected CTR improvement tactics that work
Expected CTR measures your predicted click-through rate against competitors in the same auction—meaning a “good” absolute CTR can still receive a “Below Average” rating if competitors perform better. Industry CTR benchmarks for 2025 range from 2.4% (B2B) to over 6% (personal services and dating).
Competitor analysis provides immediate insights. The Auction Insights report reveals your actual auction competitors, while Google’s Ads Transparency Center lets you view their creative. Identify what makes competitor ads compelling—urgency language, specific offers, benefit-focused copy—then adapt these elements authentically.
Tight ad group structure consistently outperforms broad groupings. A Clicteq case study found that implementing Single Keyword Ad Groups (SKAGs) improved Quality Score from an impression-weighted average of 5.56 to 7.95 while increasing CTR by 28.1%. The mechanism is straightforward: narrower ad groups allow more precise keyword-to-ad matching.
Negative keywords protect CTR more than most advertisers realize. Filtering irrelevant traffic prevents wasted impressions that drag down click-through rates. For luxury products, add “cheap” and “affordable” as negatives. For services, exclude “DIY,” “jobs,” “salary,” and “free.” Weekly search terms report review should be standard practice.
Ad extensions (now called “assets”) increase visibility and CTR, though they don’t directly input into Quality Score. However, Google notes that ads with good Quality Score are more likely to display assets—creating a reinforcing cycle. At minimum, enable sitelinks, callouts, and structured snippets.
Ad relevance optimization techniques
Ad relevance receives only 22% weighting, but “Below Average” ratings here still drag down overall scores significantly. The primary lever is alignment between keywords and ad copy.
Organize ad groups by theme, not convenience. If you’re selling rings, separate “engagement rings” from “wedding bands” into distinct ad groups with tailored creative. When a single ad cannot effectively address all keywords in a group, that group needs splitting. Google explicitly recommends keeping ad groups tightly focused with 5-20 closely related keywords.
Include primary keywords in headlines. When search terms match ad text exactly, Google bolds that text—increasing visual prominence and clicks. Dynamic Keyword Insertion (DKI) can automate this for large accounts, but manual keyword inclusion in headlines works equally well for smaller campaigns.
Avoid polished but generic corporate language. Headlines like “Industry-Leading Solutions” satisfy no search intent. Instead, mirror the specific language users actually type. If targeting “pie” queries, don’t serve ads about “tarts”—Google judges exact query matches as more relevant.
Local service business optimization strategies
Local businesses face unique Quality Score dynamics. Location-based ads convert 40% better than non-targeted campaigns, and including geographic terms in keywords and ad copy simultaneously boosts relevance and CTR.
Industry benchmarks for 2024-2025
| Industry | Avg. CTR | Avg. CPC | Avg. Conversion Rate |
| Attorneys & Legal | 5.30% | $8.94 | 5.64% |
| Dentists & Dental | 5.38% | $6.82 | 8.36% |
| Home & Home Improvement | 5.59% | $6.96 | 8.62% |
| Physicians & Surgeons | 6.73% | $4.76 | 11.08% |
| Automotive Repair | 5.69% | $3.39 | 12.96% |
| Real Estate | 9.20% | $2.10 | 2.91% |
Geographic keyword strategy: Use “plumber in [City]” rather than just “plumber.” Neighborhood-level keywords like “emergency plumber Back Bay” outperform city-level terms for relevance. Target zip codes for granular control over service area coverage.
Location targeting settings require attention. Use “Presence” (people physically in your locations) rather than “Presence or Interest” to avoid paying for clicks from people merely researching your area. The exception: Real Estate, Travel, and Education campaigns show 5% more conversions with “Presence or Interest” enabled.
Service-specific landing pages are essential. Sending “water heater repair” searches to your homepage tanks landing page experience scores. Create dedicated pages at URLs like /services/water-heater-repair with matching keywords in titles, H1s, and body content.
For businesses running Local Services Ads alongside traditional Search Ads: LSAs don’t use Quality Score at all. Their ranking depends on reviews, responsiveness, proximity, and business hours. Many home service businesses should use both—LSAs for high-intent local leads plus Search Ads for broader reach.
Common Quality Score mistakes and fixes
Mixing unrelated keywords in one ad group makes writing relevant ads impossible. The fix: restructure into tightly themed groups where a single ad can authentically address every keyword.
Sending traffic to homepage or generic pages weakens landing page experience scores immediately. Direct users to specific, relevant pages matching the search query and ad content.
Using broad match without controls exposes ads to irrelevant queries, killing CTR and inflating costs. Avoid broad match except on established, high-performing campaigns with robust negative keyword lists. Prefer phrase and exact match.
Deleting low Quality Score keywords prematurely causes problems—Google treats re-added keywords as duplicates linked to historical performance. Pause instead of delete, and consider restructuring before removal. Ensure keywords have sufficient impression data before judging.
Obsessing over Quality Score as a KPI misses the point. Google explicitly states Quality Score is a diagnostic tool, not a performance metric. Focus on improving user experience and measure actual business outcomes: conversions, cost per acquisition, and return on ad spend.
Mobile and page speed requirements
Google’s documentation states that more than half of visits are abandoned if mobile pages take over 3 seconds to load. Sites loading in 1 second have 5x higher conversion rates than those loading in 10 seconds. Target PageSpeed Insights scores of 90+ across Performance, Accessibility, Best Practices, and SEO.
Technical optimization priorities for landing pages:
- Compress images using AVIF or WebP formats
- Implement lazy loading for below-fold content
- Minify CSS, JavaScript, and HTML
- Deploy a Content Delivery Network (CDN)
- Enable browser caching with appropriate headers
- Optimize server response time (Time to First Byte)
- Reduce third-party script dependencies
- Reserve explicit dimensions for images to prevent layout shift
Mobile-specific requirements include responsive design that adapts rather than simply shrinks, touch targets at minimum 48×48 pixels, simplified navigation for small screens, and elimination of intrusive pop-ups that block content.
Conclusion
Quality Score optimization for 2025-2026 requires no dramatic strategy shifts—the fundamentals Google rewards have remained stable. The highest-impact opportunities remain improving landing page speed and Expected CTR, which together account for 78% of the score. Local service businesses should prioritize geographic keyword targeting, service-specific landing pages, and aggressive negative keyword management.
The most common failure pattern is structural: overly broad ad groups that prevent keyword-to-ad relevance. Restructuring accounts around tight thematic groupings—whether through SKAGs or intent-based ad groups—consistently delivers Quality Score improvements of 2-3 points. Combined with sub-3-second mobile page loads and clear CTAs, these fundamentals generate the 50% CPC discounts that separate profitable campaigns from money-losing ones.
