Performance Max has been one of the most significant shifts in the evolution of Google Ads over the past few years. Introduced as a campaign type designed to automate and unify advertising across Google’s entire inventory, it promised improved performance through machine learning, simplified management and access to channels that were previously managed separately.
Since its launch, however, Performance Max has continued to evolve. Google has gradually introduced new features, reporting improvements and structural changes intended to give advertisers more control while still retaining the automation that sits at the heart of the campaign type.
For advertisers, this ongoing development means that the way Performance Max campaigns should be managed is not static. Strategies that worked two years ago may not necessarily represent best practice today.
This article explores the key changes that have been introduced to Performance Max, what those changes mean in practice, and how advertisers should adapt their approach in order to maintain strong performance.
A Brief Reminder: What Performance Max Was Designed to Do
Before examining the changes, it is worth revisiting the original concept behind Performance Max.
Performance Max campaigns were introduced as a way to run advertising across multiple Google properties from a single campaign. Rather than creating separate campaigns for Search, Display, YouTube, Discover, Gmail and Shopping, advertisers could provide assets, product feeds and conversion goals, allowing Google’s automation to decide where and how ads should appear.
The system determines placements, bidding, audience targeting and creative combinations based on machine learning models.
For ecommerce advertisers, Performance Max also replaced Smart Shopping campaigns. This meant that many businesses effectively had to adopt Performance Max in order to continue running shopping-based advertising.
From the beginning, the promise was improved performance through automation. The trade-off, however, was reduced transparency and control.
Many of the changes introduced over the past year have been attempts to address those concerns.
Improved Search Term Visibility
One of the biggest criticisms of Performance Max has been the lack of visibility around search queries.
When Performance Max launched, advertisers had almost no insight into which search terms were triggering their ads. This made it difficult to understand user intent, identify irrelevant traffic or refine campaign targeting.
More recently, Google has introduced improved search term reporting for Performance Max campaigns.
Advertisers can now see a larger proportion of the search queries that drive traffic through their campaigns. While this visibility is still not as detailed as traditional Search campaigns, it represents a meaningful improvement.
This development matters for several reasons.
Firstly, advertisers can now identify irrelevant queries that may be wasting budget. This allows for the addition of negative keywords at the account level or campaign level.
Secondly, it provides insight into how the campaign is interpreting audience signals and creative assets. If a campaign is showing for unexpected queries, it may indicate that asset messaging or audience signals need to be adjusted.
Thirdly, it helps advertisers identify opportunities that may justify separate Search campaigns. High-performing queries discovered through Performance Max may deserve dedicated campaigns where bidding and messaging can be more tightly controlled.
In practical terms, advertisers should make it a habit to review search term insights regularly. Performance Max is still highly automated, but ignoring search behaviour entirely is no longer necessary.
Campaign-Level Negative Keywords
Another major development has been the introduction of negative keywords at the campaign level.
Historically, advertisers could only apply negative keywords to Performance Max campaigns through account-level lists or by requesting assistance through Google representatives.
This was a significant limitation.
Negative keywords are one of the fundamental tools used to control search traffic quality. Without them, advertisers had very limited ability to prevent ads from appearing for irrelevant or low-intent searches.
Google has since expanded the ability to apply negative keywords directly within Performance Max campaigns.
This provides advertisers with a more practical way to manage search traffic quality.
For example, ecommerce advertisers may want to exclude informational queries that suggest a user is researching rather than purchasing. Lead generation advertisers may want to exclude terms such as “free”, “jobs” or “training”.
Advertisers should approach this capability carefully. Adding large numbers of negative keywords can interfere with the machine learning system’s ability to explore new opportunities.
Instead, negative keywords should be used primarily to block clearly irrelevant traffic rather than attempting to micromanage search targeting.
Brand Controls and Brand Exclusions
Brand traffic has also been a major topic of discussion around Performance Max.
Many advertisers discovered that a large proportion of Performance Max conversions were coming from branded search queries. While this can inflate reported performance, it may not represent incremental value if the brand traffic would have converted anyway.
To address this, Google has introduced stronger brand control options.
Advertisers can now apply brand exclusions to Performance Max campaigns. This allows campaigns to be prevented from showing for specific branded queries.
For example, a retailer running separate branded Search campaigns may want to exclude their own brand from Performance Max in order to maintain clearer performance measurement.
Brand exclusions can also be useful when advertisers want Performance Max campaigns to focus on prospecting and new customer acquisition.
That said, brand exclusions should be implemented carefully.
In some cases, allowing Performance Max to capture branded traffic can improve overall efficiency if the campaign delivers lower cost-per-clicks or improved conversion rates.
The key is understanding how brand traffic fits within the broader account structure.
Better Asset-Level Reporting
Another area that has improved significantly is asset reporting.
Performance Max relies heavily on creative assets, including headlines, descriptions, images and videos. Google’s system automatically combines these elements to create different ad variations across channels.
Previously, advertisers had very limited insight into which assets were contributing to performance.
Google has since expanded asset reporting capabilities, providing clearer signals about which assets are performing well and which may be underperforming.
Assets are now categorised using performance labels such as “Best”, “Good” or “Low”.
While these labels should not be interpreted as precise performance metrics, they can still provide useful guidance.
For example, consistently low-performing assets may indicate that messaging is not resonating with users. Replacing these assets with new variations can help maintain creative freshness.
Advertisers should view asset groups as an ongoing optimisation opportunity rather than something that is set once and left unchanged.
Regularly testing new headlines, descriptions and images can improve campaign performance over time.
Channel Performance Insights
One of the most persistent frustrations around Performance Max has been the lack of clarity regarding where ads are actually appearing.
Because the campaign runs across multiple channels simultaneously, advertisers often struggled to determine whether their budget was being spent on Search, Display, YouTube or other placements.
Google has begun introducing improved channel-level insights that provide a better understanding of where traffic and conversions are coming from.
While these insights are still relatively high level, they can help advertisers understand how the campaign is distributing spend.
For example, a campaign might show a strong reliance on YouTube placements, or a significant proportion of conversions coming from Search inventory.
Understanding these patterns can help advertisers make better decisions around campaign structure and budget allocation.
If Performance Max is heavily using Search inventory, advertisers may want to evaluate whether separate Search campaigns could provide additional control.
Customer Acquisition Features
Another notable change has been the development of new customer acquisition tools.
For many advertisers, especially ecommerce brands, acquiring new customers is often more valuable than driving repeat purchases.
Performance Max now includes settings that allow advertisers to prioritise new customer acquisition.
This can involve bidding more aggressively for users who have not previously interacted with the business.
These features rely on customer data signals, which means advertisers may need to upload customer lists or ensure that conversion tracking captures new versus returning customers accurately.
While the system is not perfect, it represents an attempt to align campaign optimisation with broader business objectives rather than focusing purely on conversion volume.
Improved Retail Reporting
Retail advertisers have also seen improvements in reporting tied to product performance.
Because Performance Max often relies on product feeds, understanding which products drive revenue is essential.
Google has expanded reporting features that allow advertisers to analyse performance at the product level within Performance Max campaigns.
This enables businesses to identify high-performing products, seasonal trends and opportunities for feed optimisation.
Feed quality remains one of the most important factors influencing Performance Max performance.
Titles, descriptions, product images and structured attributes all contribute to how products are matched with user searches.
Advertisers should treat feed optimisation as an ongoing process rather than a one-time setup task.
How Advertisers Should Adapt Their Approach
The growing list of Performance Max updates suggests that Google is gradually moving towards a hybrid model.
Automation remains central, but advertisers now have more tools available to guide and refine the system.
To make the most of these changes, advertisers should focus on several key principles.
Firstly, conversion tracking remains critical.
Performance Max relies entirely on conversion signals to guide its optimisation. If conversion tracking is inaccurate, delayed or incomplete, the campaign will optimise towards the wrong outcomes.
Advertisers should ensure that conversion tracking reflects meaningful business results rather than superficial engagement metrics.
Secondly, campaign structure still matters.
While Performance Max simplifies many aspects of campaign management, the way asset groups, feeds and audience signals are organised can significantly influence results.
Segmenting campaigns by product category, business objective or customer type can provide clearer performance signals to the algorithm.
Thirdly, asset quality should not be underestimated.
Automation does not eliminate the need for strong creative. Headlines, images and videos still play a critical role in influencing user behaviour.
Providing diverse, high-quality assets increases the likelihood that Google’s system can find combinations that resonate with different audiences.
Fourthly, advertisers should actively monitor search insights and query behaviour.
Even though Performance Max is not a traditional Search campaign, understanding search intent can still provide valuable optimisation opportunities.
Finally, patience is essential.
Performance Max campaigns require time to learn and stabilise. Frequent structural changes can reset the learning process and create performance volatility.
Advertisers should allow campaigns to gather sufficient data before making significant adjustments.
Balancing Automation and Control
The evolution of Performance Max highlights an ongoing tension within digital advertising.
Automation offers powerful optimisation capabilities, but advertisers still want visibility and control.
Google appears to be gradually acknowledging this by introducing features that provide more insight without fundamentally changing the automated nature of the campaign type.
For advertisers, the challenge is learning how to guide the system effectively rather than trying to control every detail.
Providing strong data, clear goals and high-quality assets is often more impactful than attempting to micromanage campaign settings.
Conclusion
Performance Max continues to evolve, and the changes introduced over the past year suggest that Google is attempting to address many of the concerns raised by advertisers.
Improved search term insights, campaign-level negative keywords, brand exclusions and better reporting are all steps towards greater transparency and control.
At the same time, the core philosophy of Performance Max remains unchanged. Automation and machine learning continue to drive most optimisation decisions.
For advertisers, success with Performance Max requires adapting to this hybrid environment.
Those who provide strong data signals, maintain high-quality assets and actively monitor performance insights are more likely to see strong results.
As Google continues refining the platform, advertisers should remain attentive to new features and updates.
Performance Max is still evolving, and the strategies that deliver the best results will continue to evolve alongside it.