Using Exact Match keywords in your AdWords campaigns? You’re likely aware of Google’s recent redefinition of “Exact.” However, the potential [LEVEL OF FEAR MONGERING] this change holds for your account might still be under your radar.

Exact Match keywords, prized for their precision in targeting branded terms, top performers, or product names with high-intent modifiers, were the cornerstone of numerous AdWords accounts. Their accuracy ensured ROI, unlike broader match types that often attracted irrelevant traffic.

But the winds of change have swept through.

The Evolution of Exact Match Keywords

In the not-so-distant past (mere weeks ago), Exact Match keywords adhered to a strict matching system:

1. Identical search queries ([buy aubergine crocs] aligning perfectly with the search “buy aubergine crocs”)
2. Close variants, which, before mid-March, encompassed only misspellings, singular/plural forms, acronyms, stemming (like floor and flooring), abbreviations, and accents.

This rigidity has since softened.

Intriguing, isn’t it?

This change might be beneficial for some advertisers. The principle behind close variants was sound. If you’re selling “shiny baubles” and bid on the Exact Match keyword “shiny bauble,” you’d want your ads to appear for searches like “shiny bobles” or “shiny baubles.” Through close variants, Google aimed to eliminate the need for advertisers to add countless keywords with essentially the same meaning.

However, while assisting busy advertisers and “connecting more people with what they’re looking for” is admirable, it deviates from the essence of “Exact.”

Introducing: Exact-Enough Match Keywords

The revamped Exact Match now accommodates search queries containing the same words as the keyword, albeit in a different sequence. For instance: The Exact Match keyword [men’s dress shirt] can now trigger ads for both the precise search query men’s dress shirt and the not-so-exact dress shirt men’s.

But that’s not all!

Several other scenarios allow Exact Match keywords to be activated by inexact search queries, all hinging on the presence (or lack thereof) of function words and “other words that often don’t impact the intent behind a query.”

Deconstructing Function Words

Remember fourth grade, nestled between reading Holes and recorder practice? Function words encompass prepositions (“in,” “to,” “for”), conjunctions (“and,” “but,” “or”), and articles (“a,” “an,” “the”).

This change empowers Exact Match to disregard, add, or remove function words to capture similar search queries. The intended outcome seems to be materializing: Google reports that accounts have witnessed up to a 3% surge in clicks.

Google’s rationale for this shift is logical: function words rarely influence searcher intent. Someone searching for “jobs in united states” likely seeks the same information as someone searching for “jobs in the united states” or “jobs united states.”

Regrettably, semantic matching can be impractical, counterproductive, and potentially expensive.

As per our data scientist, Mark Irvine: Brand advertisers might observe their accounts faltering due to this change, especially if their brand name incorporates a location or other common words. Consider The Copley Square Hotel bidding on its exact brand name [The Copley Square Hotel]. To them, a search for “The Copley Square Hotel” represents highly qualified brand traffic, while “Hotel by Copley Square” or “Copley Square Hotel” are essentially non-branded searches.

The Comprehensive Impact of Exact-Enough Match Keywords

Our marketing team’s data whiz, Josh, crafted a script to eliminate function words from the active Exact Match keywords of 100 client accounts.

This exercise helped us gauge the potential impact of the broader Exact Match on diverse AdWords accounts across various industries.

The 100 accounts were randomly selected, all exceeding $1,000 in monthly spend. All metrics reflect performance 30 days prior to March 23.

After removing function words, Josh de-duplicated the dataset to account for keywords rendered redundant by the new “Exact.”

A quick note on the broader discussion regarding the impact of the Exact Match changes: Our analytical approach differs significantly from that of Aaron Levy in his insightful post, “What the data tells us about the death of exact match and its impact,” on Search Engine Land (a recommended read filled with valuable insights). While Aaron focused on three specific accounts, we aimed for a broader perspective. In the coming weeks, we’ll delve into individual accounts significantly affected by these changes, so stay tuned!

Before diving into the overview, here are some key takeaways:

• Of the 100 accounts, only 67 utilized active Exact Match keywords
• We analyzed a total of 3,399 active Exact Match keywords
• On average, each account had 9 exact match keywords removed during deduplication

41% of Exact Match Keyword Spend: Impacted

Our dataset encompassed nearly $69,000 in Exact Match keyword spend over 30 days. Of this, 41% was allocated to keywords now considered duplicates by Google.

While 59% of the Exact Match keyword spend remained unaffected (indicating effective utilization of close variants and negative keywords by advertisers), a significant portion is still unaccounted for. This equates to roughly $422 per analyzed account that AdWords will now distribute among similar keyword auctions.

Personally, I prefer complete control over my hard-earned $422 advertising budget.

36% of Exact Match Keyword Impressions: Impacted

Previously, impressions attributed to Exact Match keywords implied an identical search query or a close variant (refer to the previous section).

Our analysis of 1,080,989 impressions linked to Exact Match keywords revealed that 36% were for keywords rendered practically inconsequential.

Consequently, 36% of these Exact Match keywords are now vying for the same impressions in the same auctions as other Exact Match keywords within these accounts.

This poses a two-pronged challenge for advertisers.

Firstly, it complicates account management. Identifying duplicate keywords is tedious, but pinpointing their location and potential cost implications demands significant time investment.

More critically, bidding on numerous keywords targeting the same SERP real estate within a single auction can inflate your CPCs.

Not ideal.

18% of Exact Match Keywords: Affected by Google’s Semantic Shift

Across the 100 accounts, Josh found that 18% of all Exact Match keywords, when stripped of function words, were duplicates of at least one other Exact Match keyword.

As mentioned earlier, this internal competition is concerning. However, it’s crucial to note that in AdWords, the “best” option isn’t always the winner.

With multiple Exact Match keywords competing in the same auction, Google won’t automatically favor the keyword with the optimal CPC or conversion rate, unlike a scenario where you have absolute control. While 18% might seem insignificant, a change impacting nearly a fifth of your Exact Match keywords can potentially increase costs and decrease ad relevance.

Navigating the Exact Match Keyword Changes

Firstly, apologies for subjecting you to the phrase “Exact Match keyword” 327 times.

As you adapt to Google’s redefined Exact Match, monitor your Search Terms Report (or QueryStream) meticulously. Analyze your top-performing Exact Match keywords. Are they single words or long-tail phrases? For multi-word keywords, list each word and its possible permutations.

If any reordered search terms are irrelevant, add them as negatives and adjust bids to prioritize high-performing keywords while letting ineffective ones fade away.

Seeking more insights? Join our live webinar TODAY on the 3 crucial aspects of the Exact Match keyword changes, hosted by Senior Data Scientist Mark Irvine.

Data Sources

Data is based on the analysis of 100 randomly selected AdWords accounts from our customer base (nexus-security customers) with monthly spends exceeding $1. All account metrics reflect performance 30 days prior to March 23, 2017.