A Test of Cost Per Action (CPA) Vs Cost Per Click
(CPC) in Google AdwordsTuesday, July 07, 2009 at 12:25 PM EDT
The traditional approach to
Google Adwords is to set a bid price for each keyword. This is known as Cost
Per Click (CPC). Google then then uses the bid prices in conjunction with a
secret formula (the quality
score) to decide how high to rank your ad in the Adwords results. If you
bid more, your ad will appear higher and typically get more clicks, but your
cost per click will increase. So setting an optimal bid price is important. Bid
too little and you won’t rank high enough to get a decent number of
clickthroughs. Bid too much and you will potentially end paying more to Google
than you recoup in sales.
An alternative approach is to tell Google Adwords how much you are prepared
to pay for a particular action, e.g. a sign-up, download or sale. This is known
as Cost
Per Action (CPA) or Conversion Optimizer. Google will then automatically
calculate your bid prices and attempt not to exceed the CPA you set (although
this isn’t guaranteed).
CPA sounds great. I can stay in bed a bit longer while the mighty Google
brain does the bid tweaking for me. Unfortunately I wasn’t able to use
CPA. I count sales as conversions (not downloads) and I have my adwords account
split into a number of campaigns by geographic region and by type (e.g. search
vs content). Having my campaigns structured like this, rather than one
monolithic campaign, makes for more flexibility (e.g. different ads, phrases
and bid prices for different geographical areas) and more useful reports (e.g.
separate reports for search and content). But it also meant none of my Adwords
campaigns made the minimum threshold for conversions per month.
When Google dropped the minimum threshold for CPA to 30 conversions per
campaign per month, one of my Perfect Table Plan search campaigns
became eligible. So I did an experiment. I ran a campaign for 4 weeks using
CPC, then 9 weeks using CPA, then another 4 weeks using CPC. I set the CPA bid
to roughly the average cost per conversion I got for CPC. I was curious to see
if Google would find sweet spots that I had been missing or whether they would
bid as high as they could to take as much money off me as possible. Summary:
CPC outperformed CPA on all key metrics, including: 4.4% higher conversions,
9.4% lower cost per conversions and 8.0% higher profit.
The detailed results are as follows:
metric |
CPC (vs
CPA) |
impressions/day |
+13.9% |
clicks/day |
+1.3% |
conversions/day |
+4.4% |
CTR |
-11.1% |
conv rate |
+3.1% |
income/day |
+4.4% |
cost/day |
-5.5% |
CPC |
-6.6% |
profit/day |
+8.0% |
PKI |
-5.2% |
ROI |
+10.4% |
cost per conversion |
-9.4% |
In graphical form (click to enlarge):
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b12cb/b12cbb93f39ea7ac2058d2f4d013809d16d7bdc4" alt="CPA vs CPC graph 50pc CPA vs CPC graph 50pc"
Notes:
- The values given are taken by computing (CPC metric – CPA
metric)/(CPA metric). E.g. ROI of +10.4% means that CPC had a 10.4% higher
ROI than CPA.
- Only a single (geographically based) search campaign was measured. The
total number of conversions during the time period of the test was in 3
figures.
- I only measured sale conversions. This gives me less data than measuring
downloads, but I think it is unsafe to assume the number of downloads
correlates closely to the number of sales.
- The PerfectTablePlan sale price is £19.95/$29.95. To calculate profit
I only counted 75% of the price of a sale (the other 25% was assumed to cover
the cost of support, ecommerce fees and other overheads associated with the
sale).
- Each of the time periods was a multiple of 7 days to avoid any issues with
different results on different days of the week.
- I ran CPC for an equal amount of time either side of the CPA test to try to
balance out any seasonal factors.
- Google conversion tracking uses
Cookies and is therefore not 100% accurate.
- PKI is Profit Per Thousand Impressions.
- ROI is Return On Investment.
It wouldn’t be wise to draw any sweeping conclusions from one test
with a limited amount of data. However I believe the results show:
- A CPA campaign running for 9 weeks wasn’t able to outperform a
mature
CPC campaign. The CPC campaign had been running for over 4 years, but one would
have thought CPA would have been able to use that pre-existing data. CPA might
have performed better if given longer. It would probably also have done better
against a less mature CPC campaign.
- Google didn’t rob me blind using CPA bidding. The CPA cost per day
was only 5.5% higher.
- The results weren’t hugely different. On the basis of the above
results one might still conclude that CPA is superior to CPC as it requires
less time to manage.
|