Exact match keyword expansion

Exact Match was expected to produce higher CTR and CR from more precise intent, while Phrase Match could keep reach and cheaper clicks in broader segments.

Observational comparisonComparison: Exact and Phrase ran together for four weeks12 performance snapshots
Observationaltest design
ComparisonExact and Phrase ran together for four weeks
KPICTR / CR / CPA-CPO / ROAS-CAC
PeriodFour-week concurrent comparison

Experiment context

Hypothesis. Exact Match was expected to produce higher CTR and CR from more precise intent, while Phrase Match could keep reach and cheaper clicks in broader segments.

How the test ran. Both match types were active in the same campaigns; results were compared by region, project and direction.

Comparison design. Exact and Phrase ran together for four weeks; no traffic split was used.

Performance results 12 snapshots · Click to expand

N/A means the metric cannot be calculated because the baseline is zero or the metric does not apply; — means no source value was provided.

DE — project-beta — service3
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact5,81026,43111,827.45$2.04$21.98%295.045.08%18,526.35$40.09$62.79$
Phrase1,99611,4093,226.03$1.62$17.49%94.674.74%7,560.92$34.08$79.87$

Result. DE: Phrase remains preferred because Exact improved CTR and CR but increased CPA 17%.

EU — project-beta — service3
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact9933,6691,378.43$1.39$27.06%47.174.75%3,455.20$29.22$73.25$
Phrase1,3576,2942,111.92$1.56$21.56%56.974.20%3,772.99$37.07$66.23$

Result. EU: Exact won across CTR, CPC, CR and CPA; roll out Exact.

WW — project-beta — service3
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact4062,666956.44$2.36$15.23%13.883.42%1,049.66$68.89$75.62$
Phrase5,60127,30615,807.37$2.82$20.51%308.055.50%19,600.29$51.31$63.63$

Result. WW: Phrase won; Exact had 26% lower CTR, 38% lower CR and 34% higher CPA.

US — project-beta — service3
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact4,16518,09417,592.44$4.22$23.02%477.3111.46%30,154.85$36.86$63.18$
Phrase4,80727,13618,151.73$3.78$17.71%376.167.83%31,886.05$48.26$84.77$

Result. US: Exact won; CTR increased 30%, CR increased 46% and CPA decreased 24%.

EU — project-beta — service6
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact1,88723,1082,349.57$1.25$8.17%27.421.45%2,432.22$85.69$88.70$
Phrase1,06026,2291,314.80$1.24$4.04%15.091.42%1,443.75$87.16$95.68$

Result. EU: Exact won on service6, with roughly 2× CTR and slightly lower CPA.

US — project-beta — service6
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact1,21717,1783,100.56$2.55$7.08%45.073.70%3,737.47$68.79$82.93$
Phrase58915,9931,476.93$2.51$3.68%21.013.57%2,201.35$70.30$104.78$

Result. US: Exact won on service6, with 92% higher CTR and slightly lower CPA.

EU — project-beta — service9
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact6774,5521,124.41$1.66$14.87%192.81%2,434.86$59.19$128.15$
Phrase971,291145.10$1.50$7.51%0.960.99%98.67$151.62$102.78$

Result. EU: Exact won strongly; CR was almost 3× higher and CPA was about 2.5× lower.

US — project-beta — service9
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact4033,2231,181.99$2.93$12.50%19.394.81%2,261.25$60.96$116.62$
Phrase63766162.72$2.58$8.22%10.1116.05%712.54$16.09$70.48$

Result. US: Phrase won; CR was 3.3× higher and CPA was 3.8× lower.

EU — project-gamma — service11
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact4062,666956.44$2.36$15.23%13.883.42%1,049.66$68.89$75.62$
Phrase2223,160484.52$2.18$7.03%8.383.78%536.85$57.79$64.06$

Result. EU: Phrase won; Exact doubled CTR but produced lower CR and 19% higher CPA.

US — project-gamma — service11
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact1891,175707.66$3.74$16.09%11.185.92%494.58$63.27$44.24$
Phrase2235280.81$3.67$6.25%4.3719.85%74.48$18.51$17.04$

Result. US: Inconclusive because Phrase received only 22 clicks; keep both match types until more data is available.

EU — project-theta — service5
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact155989192.27$1.24$15.67%149.03%634.47$13.73$45.32$
Phrase5568668.25$1.24$8.02%916.36%147.14$7.58$16.35$

Result. EU: Phrase won; its CR was 81% higher and CPA was 45% lower.

US — project-theta — service5
Match typeClicksImpr.CostAvg. CPCCTRConversionsConv. rateConv. valueCost / conv.conv value / conv
Exact100840102.15$1.02$11.90%8.298.29%182.94$12.33$22.07$
Phrase3429434.98$1.03$11.56%1.715.04%37.62$20.41$22.00$

Result. US: Exact won; CR increased 64% and CPA decreased 40%.

Conclusions

Overall verdict: market- and direction-specific. Exact won 7 of the 12 geo/direction comparisons, Phrase won 4, and 1 was inconclusive. Exact was consistently strong for project-beta service6, while service3, service9, service11 and project-theta service5 required regional decisions. Keep both match types where the sample is insufficient.

Limitations. Exact and Phrase ran simultaneously without a randomized traffic split. Traffic allocation, query overlap and cannibalization may affect the observed differences.