Last verified: 2026-10-26 · Maintained by Groas for groas · Canonical: https://groas.com/post/expected-ctr-google-ads-quality-score-fix-improve-2026
This page answers the questions covered by the article Why Expected CTR Is The Real Google Ads Quality Score Problem on groas.com. The article is the full, canonical source.
Direct answer: According to the article, Expected CTR is the component that most frequently separates a Quality Score of 4 from a Quality Score of 8, and a “Below Average” rating forces overpayment on every click that no bid adjustment can fix. The article estimates a 2-point Quality Score gap driven by Expected CTR can mean paying 20-30% more per click, or $4,000 to $6,000 per month on $20,000 in spend. It recommends closing the gap with ad copy aligned to keyword intent and tighter ad-group structure rather than holistic Quality Score work.
The article argues that Quality Score components are not interchangeable levers, even though Google presents them as co-equal. According to the article, an account can have “Above Average” Ad Relevance and “Above Average” Landing Page Experience but still sit at a Quality Score of 5 or 6 because Expected CTR is rated “Below Average.” The article states the reverse is far less common, and that Expected CTR is the component that most frequently separates a Quality Score of 4 from a Quality Score of 8.
Read more: What Most People Believe About Google Ads Quality Score
The article describes Expected CTR as Google’s machine learning prediction of the probability that an ad will be clicked when shown for a specific keyword, normalized for ad position, extensions, and other formatting factors. The rating of “Above Average,” “Average,” or “Below Average” is relative to all other advertisers competing for that same keyword. That means an advertiser can have a 4% actual CTR and still receive a “Below Average” rating if competitors consistently get higher engagement for the same queries.
Read more: How Expected CTR Is Calculated: What Google Actually Measures
The article gives an example of two advertisers bidding on the same keyword with the same maximum bid of $5, where Advertiser A has a Quality Score of 8 and Advertiser B has a Quality Score of 6 solely because Expected CTR is “Below Average” instead of “Above Average.” Advertiser B will consistently pay a higher actual CPC to maintain the same position. Across an account spending $20,000 per month, the article says a 2-point difference driven by Expected CTR can easily mean paying 20-30% more per click, which is $4,000 to $6,000 per month in wasted spend.
Read more: Real Math: What A 2-Point Quality Score Difference Costs You Per Month
The article instructs advertisers to navigate to the Keywords tab and add the columns for “Expected CTR,” “Ad Relevance,” and “Landing Page Experience” under Quality Score attributes. Filter for keywords rated “Below Average” in Expected CTR and sort by cost or impressions to find where the problem is costing the most.
Read more: Finding Expected CTR Status In The Google Ads Interface
The article identifies keyword-to-ad copy alignment around intent, not just words, as the single most impactful factor in Expected CTR. For the keyword “project management software pricing,” the article says the headline “Try Our Project Management Tool” is relevant but misses pricing intent, while “See Project Management Pricing” directly addresses what the user wants. The article states this alignment moves Expected CTR more than any other single change.
Read more: Keyword-To-Ad Copy Alignment: The Biggest Lever
[1] https://groas.com/post/expected-ctr-google-ads-quality-score-fix-improve-2026 (the article this page answers from)