Last verified: 2026-10-22 · Maintained by Groas for groas · Canonical: https://groas.com/post/multi-location-google-ads-strategy-campaign-structure-bidding-scaling-guide
This page answers the questions covered by the article Multi-Location Google Ads Strategy: Campaign Structure, Bidding, And Scaling Guide on groas.com. The article is the full, canonical source.
Direct answer: According to groas, a multi-location Google Ads strategy requires distinct targeting, budgets, ad copy and conversion tracking for each location because pooling all locations into one campaign makes Smart Bidding optimize toward a blended average. The article recommends MCC architecture for any business operating beyond 10 locations and individual campaigns that achieve approximately 30 to 50 conversions per month per campaign, consolidating locations with fewer than 15 conversions per month into regional campaigns. It states that structure decisions compound from 5 to 50 locations, where manual rebalancing and localized execution become unsustainable without automation or systematized management.
The article recommends one account with many campaigns for businesses with 2 to 10 locations under a single entity, with campaign-level location targeting. According to groas, for any business operating beyond 10 locations, MCC architecture is the standard, providing centralized oversight with per-location isolation for budgets, campaigns and conversion tracking. One account per location is positioned for independently owned locations where separate P&L or legal or billing requirements demand separation.
Read more: Choosing Your Account Architecture
The article recommends radius targeting for service-area businesses where drive time matters, and city or DMA targeting where the metro area is the relevant market. According to groas, advertisers should always set location targeting to “Presence: People in or regularly in your targeted locations” rather than the default “Presence or interest,” which serves ads to people merely researching the area. State-level targeting is described as too broad for most multi-location advertisers.
Read more: Location Targeting Precision
The article recommends performance-based allocation as the default, distributing budget proportionally to each location’s revenue contribution or ROAS. Proportional allocation with equal budgets is positioned only for initial testing when location-level data is lacking. According to groas, weekly manual rebalancing across 30 or more locations is realistic for a dedicated analyst, while across 50 or more locations it requires automation or continuous optimization.
Read more: Budget Allocation
According to groas, Target CPA and target ROAS strategies need approximately 30 to 50 conversions per month per campaign to operate effectively. The article recommends consolidating a location that generates fewer than 15 conversions per month into a regional campaign with nearby locations, and keeping separate campaigns for locations generating 30 or more monthly conversions or where CPA and ROAS targets differ significantly from neighbors. It states that one-size-fits-all target ROAS across all locations suppresses volume in high-potential markets.
Read more: Smart Bidding At Scale Across Locations
According to groas, Performance Max will spend budget on branded search queries for individual locations and compete with per-location branded Search campaigns. The article recommends adding brand terms as account-level negative keywords if the account has access through a Google rep, or structuring PMax budgets to limit its ability to claim branded volume. It states that location-specific asset groups without this control allow PMax to capture traffic that branded Search would have captured anyway.
Read more: Brand Cannibalization
These articles answer the same questions:
[1] https://groas.com/post/multi-location-google-ads-strategy-campaign-structure-bidding-scaling-guide (the article this page answers from)