Member Avatar for Bonus

I've read here and there that maybe being #1 for a keyword on PPC isn't the best all the time, but I've heard no explaination as to why? Anyone care to share?

  • 11 Contributors
  • 13 Replies
  • 127 Views
  • 1 Year Discussion Span
  • Latest Post Latest Post by lajocar

Dani AI

Generated

Short answer: position #1 only wins if the extra clicks it buys are worth their extra cost. Several posters hit parts of that idea — and pointed to cost pressure, noticed CTR quirks for right-column slots — but the full decision should be driven by measured ROI, not rank alone.

How Google decides who shows where matters here. Ad placement comes from Ad Rank, and your actual CPC is effectively set against the advertiser below you. A useful shorthand is:
Actual CPC = (AdRank_of_next_ad / Your_Quality_Score) + $0.01
That means improving relevance, ad copy, extensions and landing pages (Quality Score factors) usually lowers your CPC faster than simply bidding up to #1.

Practical plan to test whether #1 is worth it:

  • Track real conversions and assign them a value (or use gross margin).
  • Calculate the bid ceiling from your target CPA: Max CPC ≈ Target_CPA * Conversion_Rate.
  • Use bid simulator, duplicated campaign tests, or segment by top/other impressions to compare conversion rate and CPA by position. Watch sample size and intent — top-position clicks can be higher intent for some queries and lower for others.
  • Improve Quality Score and use ad extensions so you can win more prominent placements at lower bids. Consider automated bidding (Target CPA/ROAS) when you have stable conversion data so the system optimizes for profit instead of raw position.

Caveats: average position is an imperfect metric (Google now emphasizes top/absolute-top metrics), and small-sample tests, mixed intents, or cannibalization with organic listings can mislead. If the goal is pure brand exposure or share-of-voice, being #1 makes sense; if the goal is profitable customer acquisition, run the tests above and optimize for CPA/ROAS rather than rank. More on auction mechanics and metrics is available from Google Ads Help ().

Recommended Answers

All 13 Replies

Member Avatar for stymiee

Probably because of cost is my guess.

Member Avatar for Dani

Suppose there's a very popular keyword and a Google search results in eight sponsored listings being displayed to the right. The very first spot gets the best CTR. However, the very last spot also gets a pretty decent CTR since when people skim, they often read the first and read the last and miss the middle. Therefore, spot #8 might be just a tad bit lower CTR than spot #1 but a whole lot cheaper.

Member Avatar for hiacclaimdir2

If you have a bunch of money and the CTR pays more than the cost of the CPC then I would not worry about it. if it is the otherway aroung you might want to be more targeted in the Keyword or pay less for it.

Member Avatar for kimjoppie

They say that people usually look at position two or three on a web page. Who really knows, but this is why!

Member Avatar for stymiee

They say that people usually look at position two or three on a web page. Who really knows, but this is why!

Actually every study ever done on search results shows that the first position gets by far the most traffic. The difference between #1 and #2 is very big and difference between #2 and #3 is very big.

Member Avatar for fennimore

I'd say it's the cost. Especially if your visitors don't buy anything. You still have to pay for every click, right?

And also, maybe because people want alternatives. They don't usually buy what they first see. They'll want comparisons. And if they find that number 2 or three is just as good, then they'll stick with the latter, to save time and all.

Member Avatar for kimjoppie

Traffic may be one thing but in the case of paying for clicks wouldn't you be intereste dto know what the conversion rate of these clicks in position one two and three were as well. I think people naturally skip down the page for variety and comparison shopping purposes, although your studies are correct in what they hypothesise.

Member Avatar for badger911

Well, for me, I don't buy the first thing I see. I can understand that position one and two is wonderful and you get hits, but for conversion sake I think it may be better to be a little down the line. The reason why I say this is because people like to shop around. Site #8 might have more detail than site #1 on a product or service and a little more detail on a product would get me to buy what is on the ad at #8 position. Do you know what I'm trying to say?

Member Avatar for brainpulse

My experience say that its best to stay in the 2-4 mark for best hits.

Member Avatar for stymiee

The best place to be is #1. Period. It gets the most traffic by far. To think being lower is better is ridiculous.

Member Avatar for selfhelpebooks

Hmm..very interesting.
Maybe it has to do with indecisiveness?
Or they like mom and pops as opposed to the big one.

Member Avatar for kronikmedia

In pay per click I can see reasons due to cost. A first position may only have marginally higher or the same CTR than other positions in the top 5 but cost per click will be more.

For organic ranking there is nothing wrong in aiming for the top rank for your keywords. In practice top 5 rank should perform equally well. I cannot see any reason why a no1 spot will be worse off than any other position.

Member Avatar for lajocar

position 1 to 4 is best

Be a part of the DaniWeb community

We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.