# Fixing Performance Max, Shopping Feed, and tROAS Structure to Grow Ecommerce Revenue

Last verified: 2026-10-07 · Maintained by Groas for groas ·
Canonical: https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth

This page answers the questions covered by the article [How An Ecommerce Brand Fixed Google Ads Structure And Grew Revenue Without Raising Budget](https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth) on groas.com. The article is the full, canonical source.

**Direct answer:** According to groas, a specialty home goods brand with several hundred SKUs, average order values of $80 to $150, and spend of roughly $60K per month grew revenue without raising budget by fixing three structural issues: Performance Max cannibalizing branded search, feed errors across roughly 40% of SKUs, and tROAS targets held at 5x to 6x. The article describes a phased rebuild that applied brand exclusion lists, rewrote titles and corrected categories, stepped tROAS targets down to 3.5x to 4x, and segmented asset groups by margin tier. Within four to six weeks of completing all four phases, the account generated more revenue at the same monthly spend level.

## Why didn't raising Google Ads spend from $45K to $60K sustain revenue growth?

The article states the brand pushed monthly spend from $45K to $60K over two quarters. Revenue grew for the first few weeks after each increase, then flattened, while ROAS dipped with each increase and never recovered to the lower-spend level. According to groas, the cause was not only competition or creative, but unresolved structure inside the account.

Read more: [The Problem: Growth Stalled Despite Increasing Budget](https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth#the-problem-growth-stalled-despite-increasing-budget)

## How was Performance Max cannibalizing branded search in this account?

The article states no brand exclusion list was applied to Performance Max, so it served ads on branded queries and claimed conversions the dedicated branded Search campaign would have captured at lower cost. Because Performance Max reports blended ROAS across Search, Shopping, Display, YouTube and Discovery, branded conversions inflated apparent performance and masked weaker prospecting returns. According to groas, branded impression share on the dedicated Search campaign dropped as Performance Max absorbed that traffic.

Read more: [Problem 1: Performance Max Was Cannibalizing Branded Search Revenue](https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth#problem-1-performance-max-was-cannibalizing-branded-search-revenue)

## How did product feed errors suppress Shopping eligibility for 40% of SKUs?

According to groas, roughly 40% of SKUs had titles using internal product names instead of searched terms, incorrect or overly broad Google product categories, and missing or misformatted attributes like GTIN, color, and material. The article states Google matches Shopping ads to queries based on the product feed, not keywords, so those products did not enter the right auctions or entered at a disadvantage. The brand paid full price for eligible SKUs while significant catalog depth remained ineligible.

Read more: [Problem 2: The Shopping Feed Had Product Title And Category Errors Across 40% Of SKUs](https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth#problem-2-the-shopping-feed-had-product-title-and-category-errors-across-40-of-skus)

## How were tROAS targets adjusted to allow volume growth while protecting margin?

The article states tROAS targets were stepped down from the 5x to 6x range to 3.5x to 4x over a three-week period, in increments small enough for Smart Bidding to adapt without wild swings. According to groas, the logic was that 4x ROAS on larger incremental, non-branded volume is worth more than 6x ROAS on capped volume that is partly branded traffic. The article states this only works after the feed is fixed and brand traffic is separated so prospecting returns are measured accurately.

Read more: [Phase 3: Adjusting tROAS Targets To Allow Volume Growth While Protecting Margin](https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth#phase-3-adjusting-troas-targets-to-allow-volume-growth-while-protecting-margin)

## What changed to revenue after the rebuild without increasing budget?

The article states that within four to six weeks of completing all four phases, the account was generating more revenue at the same monthly spend level. According to groas, the budget that had plateaued could scale again because it was entering more auctions, entering the right auctions, and bidding with accurate performance data instead of inflated signals. The article notes the specific magnitude depends on seasonality and other factors.

Read more: [Revenue Growth Without A Proportional Increase In Spend](https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth#revenue-growth-without-a-proportional-increase-in-spend)

## Sources

[1] https://groas.com/post/ecommerce-google-ads-case-study-performance-max-shopping-feed-roas-growth (the article this page answers from)