At m19, we believe that even low-performing keywords should not be simply excluded, but rather optimized for future ad revenue. To further demonstrate this, we conducted a case study across all accounts connected to m19.

[Case Study] For each account, we compared what would happen if we “isolated ‘wasted ad spend’ and optimized it instead of removing it.” Method: We tracked total spend and sales every 30 days to evaluate how this affected overall ACOS.

Note: “Isolating ‘wasted ad spend’ and optimizing it instead of removing it” means identifying areas in ad operations where ad spend is considered inefficient or ineffective, and instead of completely cutting these costs, we work to improve them to make them more effective. This approach involves revisiting targeting, bidding strategies, and budget adjustments in areas where ad spend is deemed wasteful, with the goal of making these ads perform better in the future. This means not simply pausing ads but exploring opportunities for improvement to enhance profitability.

Simply put, it’s the idea of “not cutting off what seems ineffective, but rather trying to improve it to make it work.”

[Results] The results were quite interesting:

1. Sales decreased by 35% over the course of a year. In other words, one-third of potential revenue simply disappeared.
2. It turned out that optimizing or excluding traffic made no significant difference in ACOS. In other words, even when targeting and bidding strategies were revisited for what seemed like wasted traffic, ACOS remained unchanged.

Therefore, at m19, we aim to expand sales not by easily excluding traffic, but by applying various approaches!

Note: When managing PPC campaigns manually, we recommend setting certain keywords as “negative” to avoid wasted ad spend. This is advice for optimizing ad spend and using your budget effectively.

If you are interested, please try using m19!

SOPHOLA, Inc. Executive Officer
Head of m19 Japan
Kaori Iino