• About Us
  • Contributors
  • Guides
  • Speaking Engagements
  • Write for The SEM Post
  • Submit a tip or contact us!
  • Newsletters

The SEM Post

Latest News About SEO, SEM, PPC & Search Engines

  • Google
  • SEO
  • Mobile
  • Local
  • Bing
  • Pay Per Click
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • State of the Industry
You are here: Home / Google / Analytics / Overcoming AdWords Conversion Data Discrepancies

Overcoming AdWords Conversion Data Discrepancies

February 12, 2015 at 4:30 am PST By Steve Hammer

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
  • Evernote
  • SMS

Let’s start with a simple question.

hammer1

Actually this question is better:

How many conversions did a campaign generate last month?

Any PPC worth their salt will be able to give me a definitive number for that.  It will feed our reports and justify our marketing spend.  And more than likely it will be wrong.

I’m not talking about data losses or esoteric edge cases where pixels don’t fire.  I’m talking about the ability to pull three different numbers from Google alone even when all data gathering is perfect, let alone what any offline system might be able to report.  I can make the conversion number wrong, just by looking in a different place.  And these differences can be material.

It’s an uncomfortable conversation when a client starts wondering why the number they pulled doesn’t match the one in your monthly report.  It can call your trust into question, and harm a relationship.  If you’re right on the edge of profitability with a campaign, it can change the entire economics.  Let’s take a few moments and get in front of that situation.

hammer2

The problem is in attribution

There are really three main conversions that can end up getting attributed to a channel.  Understanding the difference can help everyone be on the same page for the metric that matters the most.  Every channel wants to be able take credit, so we have to be specific about our models.

Let’s consider four conversion paths.

  • Path one – PPC – Organic – Conversion
  • Path two – Organic – PPC – Direct – Conversion
  • Path three – PPC – Organic – Direct Conversion
  • Path four – Organic – PPC – Conversion

The least conservative one is the one that’s usually reported directly in AdWords.  This metric, called converted clicks within AdWords, counts any conversion that occurs with any adwords generated click as a conversion.  If there are more than one click, the last one gets the credit.   Of our four conversion paths, all four would report a conversion.

The middle one is the one that’s in most reports in Google Analytics.  This conversion metric is actually based on a last non-direct click attribution model.  This means that it effectively ignores direct in the conversion path.  Path two and Path four would get credited to PPC, Path one and Path three would get credited to Organic.

The final one is the one that most other packages use, and is the default in Google Analytics for the attribution reports.  This model is true last click conversion (or last interaction) and will report the least number of AdWords conversions in most cases.  In our example, only path four would be credited to PPC, while paths two and three get credited to direct.  This attribution report is available under attribution -> Model Comparison Tool.  If this is what your client believes, when you’re reporting on converted clicks they’re pretty likely to think you’re fudging the numbers.

hammer3

The good news is that the attribution report is where the differences in these models can be seen most easily.  Google Analytics calls the converted clicks model “last AdWords click”.  Here’s an example using the model comparison tool for the three models described above:attribution compared

The next level of this is to start a more holistic attribution model which considers the real value to the business.  However, that is best saved for another article.

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+
  • Pinterest
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
  • WhatsApp
  • Evernote
  • SMS
The following two tabs change content below.
  • Bio
  • Latest Posts
My Twitter profileMy Google+ profile

Steve Hammer

President & Co-Founder at Rank Hammer
Steve Hammer is President and co-founder of RankHammer, a full service search marketing agency in Dallas, Texas. Steve's experience in online media and traditional marketing allows a strategic and long-term view of search marketing. He has achieved extraordinary and sustainable results in several competitive online industries often exceeding growth rates in excess of 50% per year. Prior to RankHammer, Steve held a number of exemplary positions including Director of Search Marketing for ACE Cash Express, General Manager for Stir, and a practicing Chemical Engineer for BASF. He holds a MBA from the prestigious Kellogg School of Management. Steve is very active in the Dallas and Search Marketing community, as a former VP on the DFWSEM. He has spoken at numerous meetings and conferences including SES, ClickZLive, SMX Advanced, State of Search, Pubcon, and Interactive Insights Summit.
My Twitter profileMy Google+ profile

Latest posts by Steve Hammer (see all)

  • Overcoming AdWords Conversion Data Discrepancies - February 12, 2015
  • Near Exact Match Monitoring AdWords Script - August 15, 2014
  • Why the Advanced AdWords Certification Exam Made Me Write An AdWords Happy Hour Script - August 4, 2014

Filed Under: Analytics, Pay Per Click

Sign up for our newsletter


Comments

  1. Affan Laghari says

    February 13, 2015 at 3:17 am

    Nice article, easily explaining a slightly complex concept! Another common issue I have seen is clients not understanding that Adwords, Google Analytics & their own CRM may all have different definitions for what a conversion is.

Trackbacks

  1. SearchCap: Google Search Impact Report, Expedia Buys Orbitz & AdWords Topics says:
    February 12, 2015 at 2:00 pm

    […] Overcoming AdWords Conversion Data Discrepancies, The SEM Post […]

Founder & Editor

Jennifer Slegg (2051)

Sign up for our daily news recap & weekly newsletter.


Follow us online

  • Facebook
  • Google+
  • Linkedin
  • Pinterest
  • Twitter

Latest News

Google Quality Rater Guidelines: The Low Quality 2021 Update

Google has released a new version of the Google quality rater guidelines, a year after the last … [Read More...]

Recent Posts

  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines: The Low Quality 2021 Update
  • Rethinking Affiliate Sites With Google’s Product Review Update
  • New Google Quality Rater Guidelines, Update Adds Emphasis on Needs Met
  • Google Updates Experiment Statistics for Quality Raters
  • Analyzing “How Google Search Works” Changes from Google
  • Google Quality Rater Guidelines Update: New Introduction, Rater Bias & Political Affiliations
  • Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines: Reputation for News Sites; Video Content Updates; Quality for Information Sites
  • Google Makes Major Changes to NoFollow, Adds Sponsored & UGC Tags
  • Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines Targeting E-A-T, Page Quality & Interstitials
  • Google Local Service Ads Display Pricing Estimates for Specific Locations

Categories

  • Affiliate Marketing
  • Amazon
  • Apple
  • Bing
  • Branding
  • Browsers
  • Chrome
  • Content Marketing
  • Design
  • Domains
  • DuckDuckGo
  • Email
  • Facebook
  • Firefox
  • Foursquare
  • Google
    • Analytics
    • Google RankBrain
    • Quality Rater's Guidelines
  • History of Search
  • Industry Spotlight
  • Instagram
  • Internet Explorer
  • Links
  • Local
  • Mobile
  • Native Advertising
  • Other Search Engines
  • Pay Per Click
  • Pinterest
  • Publishers
  • Security
  • SEO
  • Snapchat
  • Social Media
  • State of the Industry
  • The SEM Post
  • Tools
  • Twitter
  • Uncategorized
  • User Experience
  • Video Marketing
  • Week in Review
  • Whitepapers
  • Wordpress
  • Yahoo
  • Yelp
  • YouTube
May 2022
MTWTFSS
« Oct  
 1
2345678
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031 

Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

Copyright © 2022 · News Pro Theme On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in