Bidding on competitor terms has always been controversial in pay-per-click advertising. IBM could bid on “Amazon Web Services,” for example, although it cannot use the trademarked terms in the ad copy. It could say “Compare to IBM” but not “AWS alternative.”
Though Google allows competitor keyword bidding, two factors have stopped advertisers from doing it. First, competitor keywords typically produce poor Google Ads Quality Scores.
Google assigns a Quality Score to all keywords. A QS measures the keyword’s relevance to the search query, ad copy, and the landing page. A keyword’s relevance is low when not used in the ad copy. Low QSs result in higher costs per click. Thus competitor keyword bidding does not typically make economic sense.
The second reason is ethics. Is it ethical to bid for competitor keywords? Why not bid solely on one’s own products or brands?
In my experience, it is ethical and applicable within commonsense boundaries. Competitor keyword bidding gives searchers options. Let the best ad win.
Competitor queries
Competitor ads likely show without bidding on those keywords owing to Google’s relaxed matching. For example, queries for “Amazon cloud” and “AWS cloud computing” could trigger IBM ads if it bids on, say, “cloud computing” or if Google’s algorithm projects a user searching for “Amazon cloud” could click IBM’s ad. Hence competitor ads will likely show for related queries unless the advertiser excludes them via negative keywords.
Advertisers should create specific campaigns to control the ads and landing pages for competitor queries. However, it’s essential to have realistic expectations. Competitor-specific campaigns will likely have poor Quality Scores and higher CPCs.
Framework
When planning competitor campaigns, create the landing page first. The goal is to convince searchers to choose a different option. The landing page must reinforce this messaging, informing visitors of the unique benefits unavailable elsewhere.
Consider the landing page below from Five9, a call-center software provider. A competitive keyword — “Genesys contact center” — triggers an ad that links to the page. The page initially highlights Five9’s accomplishments (not shown below) and then a table comparing features among its competitors. It’s compelling and persuasive.
Five9’s landing page table compares features among its competitors.
Five9’s comparative landing page includes two competitors — Genesys and Nice — but it could focus on one or the other based on volume and response.
The page’s contact form has just three fields, which encourages conversions. When requesting information from prospects, less is more.
The quote quote form has just three fields, encouraging conversions.
Ad copy
Poor Quality Scores cause ads from competitor keywords to show less and cost more. Moreover, a competitor’s ad will likely include the brand name, reinforcing its relevance to searchers. That ad will almost certainly be in one of the top three positions — above the organic listings. Furthermore, brand ads tend to deploy multiple assets, which occupy more search space. Hence an ad triggered from competitor keywords may show but not necessarily stand out.
Advertisers cannot include competitors’ names in ad copy but can imply a better alternative. If Five9 bids on “Nice AI,” the ad headline might be “Make Your Switch To Five9.”
Regardless, consider the searcher’s mindset when composing the ad copy.
“Pinning” headlines and descriptions ensures specific messaging appears in every ad. Pinning is critical in competitor campaigns but can produce low Quality Scores. That’s acceptable, however, since control over the copy matters.
It’s worth noting that Microsoft Bing shows image-based Multimedia Ads from searches on competitors’ terms. Below is an example of a Docusign ad triggered by a search for Signeasy, a competitor.
A search on Bing for “signeasy” triggers Docusign’s image ad. Click to enlarge.
Ad groups and keywords
Consolidating campaigns allows Google to collect aggregate data for better bid strategies.
Accounts generally need just one search campaign for all competitor ad groups and keywords. One competitor per ad group is typically sufficient unless search volume dictates otherwise.
For example, IBM could place multiple competitors’ keywords with little search volume into one ad group, with keyword-level URLs if each competitor had its own landing page.
Potential buyers
In short, Google’s ad platform has evolved, and so has bidding on competitor keywords. Keywords influence the ads that show, but other signals — search history, predicted performance, user location — also matter. Ads already show for competitor queries. Those searchers are potential buyers who will convert more with optimized experiences.
