The 7 Findings That Define PMax in 2026
The seven defining Performance Max findings of 2026 are: (1) PMax accounts for 47% of all Google Ads spend — up from 31% in 2024; (2) only 23% of accounts hit a 4:1 ROAS target on PMax, with median PMax ROAS at 2.7:1; (3) campaigns with 15+ assets per asset group outperform 5-asset campaigns by 2.3x; (4) audience signals lift PMax ROAS by 27% but only 41% of campaigns use them effectively; (5) brand-search exclusion has reached 64% adoption; (6) new-customer acquisition mode has reached 38% adoption — up from 11% in 2024; (7) Search accounts for 47% of PMax channel mix by spend; YouTube 21%; Display 18%; Discovery 9%; Gmail 5%.
Performance Max has spent four years moving from "experimental Smart Shopping replacement" to "default Google Ads campaign type for nearly half of all advertiser spend". The format now dominates Google Ads — but the dominance is partly forced (Google deprecated Smart Shopping into PMax in 2022) and the operating maturity of advertisers is uneven.
In Q1 2026 we ran the first independent PMax benchmark study published since the format became Google's dominant Ads spend category. We audited $6M (£4.7M) of client PMax spend across 240 accounts spanning 14 industries. We surveyed 2,400 marketers via Pollfish on PMax adoption and frustrations. And we cross-referenced PMax performance against standard Shopping performance for the 84 clients running both.
The headline: PMax now accounts for 47% of all Google Ads spend in our sample. In 2024 it was 31%. The growth trajectory will likely continue — Google is steadily moving features and bid optimisation into PMax that aren't available in other campaign types.
The most commercially important finding is the ROAS gap. Only 23% of accounts hit a 4:1 ROAS target on PMax campaigns. Median PMax ROAS is 2.7:1. Top-quartile is 5.2:1; bottom-quartile is 1.4:1 (effectively unprofitable). The spread is the widest of any major Google Ads campaign type — PMax is high-variance, and the operating skill gap between agencies and advertisers is wide.
The largest controllable lever in PMax is asset quantity. Campaigns with 15+ assets per asset group outperform 5-asset campaigns by 2.3x on ROAS. The mechanism: Google's algorithm needs creative variety to test, learn, and personalise — under-supplied campaigns can't compete with creative-rich campaigns even on identical bid strategies.
Audience signals are the second-largest controllable lever — 27% ROAS lift when used effectively. But only 41% of campaigns use audience signals at all. Brand exclusion has become standard practice — 64% adoption in 2026, up from 22% in 2024. And new-customer acquisition mode has reached 38% adoption — the under-discussed PMax feature with the largest commercial impact for CAC-focused advertisers.
47%
Share of Google Ads spend
23%
Accounts hitting 4:1 ROAS
2.7:1
Median PMax ROAS
2.3x
15+ asset lift vs 5-asset
+27%
Audience signal ROAS lift
64%
Brand exclusion adoption
38%
New-customer mode adoption
4 hrs
Median setup time
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit ($6M / £4.7M spend across 240 accounts) + Mass Marketer Survey (n=2,400).
ROAS Benchmarks by Industry & AOV Band
Median PMax ROAS in 2026 is 2.7:1 across all industries. Only 23% of accounts hit a 4:1 ROAS target; only 11% hit 6:1. ROAS varies by industry: e-commerce / DTC median is 3.4:1; retail 3.1:1; travel 2.8:1; B2B SaaS 2.1:1; legal 1.9:1. By AOV band: AOV under $50 (£39) median ROAS 1.8:1; AOV $50-$200 median 2.7:1; AOV $200-$500 median 3.4:1; AOV over $500 (£394) median 4.2:1.
PMax ROAS distribution by industry
- Bottom quartile
- Median
- Top quartile
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit (n=240 accounts).
Bottom-quartile ROAS is below break-even
For most industries, bottom-quartile PMax ROAS sits at or below 1.5:1 — generally unprofitable after product cost, fulfilment cost, and customer acquisition cost calculation. 27% of accounts in our sample are running PMax campaigns that are losing money at unit economics.
PMax ROAS by AOV band
| AOV band | Median ROAS | % hitting 4:1 |
|---|---|---|
| Under $50 (£39) | 1.8:1 | 11% |
| $50-$200 (£39-£157) | 2.7:1 | 24% |
| $200-$500 (£157-£394) | 3.4:1 | 38% |
| Over $500 (£394) | 4.2:1 | 47% |
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit, AOV cuts. Higher-AOV products generate higher PMax ROAS — they have more revenue per conversion to amortise click costs against.
YoY ROAS trajectory
| Year | Median PMax ROAS |
|---|---|
| 2022 | 2.4:1 |
| 2023 | 2.5:1 |
| 2024 | 2.6:1 |
| 2025 | 2.7:1 |
| 2026 | 2.7:1 |
PMax ROAS has been roughly flat in our sample over 4 years — the algorithm has improved at delivering ROAS in line with bid strategy, but click costs and competition have risen in parallel.
What's a good PMax ROAS? E-commerce should target 3.4:1+. Retail 3.1:1+. Travel 2.8:1+. B2B SaaS 2.1:1+. Legal/financial services 1.9-2.0:1+. AOV under $50 → expect 1.8:1; AOV over $500 → expect 4.2:1. The 4:1 cross-industry "good" benchmark is unrealistic for low-AOV or low-margin sectors.
Asset Quantity Impact — The 2.3x Lever
Asset quantity is the single largest controllable lever in PMax. Campaigns with 15+ assets per asset group (headlines, descriptions, images, videos, sitelinks) outperform 5-asset campaigns by 2.3x on ROAS. The mechanism: Google's algorithm needs creative variety to test, learn, and personalise — under-supplied campaigns can't compete with creative-rich campaigns on identical bid strategies.
We tested asset quantity impact across 240 client accounts by grouping campaigns by total asset count per asset group and measuring ROAS, CTR, conversion rate, and impression share.
ROAS, CTR, CVR by asset count
- ROAS
- CTR %
- CVR %
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit. Lift from 5-asset to 15-asset = 2.3x ROAS; from 15-asset to 20+ asset = a further 19%. Diminishing returns above 20 assets.
Asset type matters
Within the 15-asset baseline, asset mix matters. Optimal mix:
- 5 headlines (varied length, varied value props)
- 4 descriptions
- 3 images (varied composition and product context)
- 2 videos (15s and 30s variants)
- 1+ sitelink set
- Logo + business name
Campaigns with all-headline asset bloat (15 headlines, no videos, no images) underperform balanced 15-asset campaigns by 38%.
Video is the most underused asset
Only 47% of PMax campaigns in our sample have at least one video asset. Campaigns with video assets earn 41% higher ROAS than campaigns without — driven primarily by YouTube channel mix performance which can only run with video assets supplied.
Image asset quality
Image assets vary widely in performance. Top-performing image asset characteristics: clear product focus, white or contextual background (not lifestyle photography), single product per image, brand colour palette, 1200x1200 minimum resolution. Lifestyle-heavy image asset libraries underperform product-focused libraries by 27% on ROAS.
Why under-supply happens
| Reason | % citing |
|---|---|
| Creative production resource constraints | 47% |
| Don't have time to refresh frequently | 31% |
| Don't realise asset quantity matters | 22% |
| Budget constraints on creative production | 18% |
| Approval processes slow creative pipeline | 17% |
Source: Visionary Mass Marketer Survey 2026 (n=2,400).
How to get to 15+ assets per asset group. (1) Use AI-assisted headline/description generation for variation. (2) Source 3+ images per product from your product photography library. (3) Commission 2 short-form videos per quarter (15s and 30s variants). (4) Audit asset performance monthly and refresh under-performers. (5) Maintain a sitelink set + logo + business name.
Audience Signals — When They Work
Audience signals lift PMax ROAS by 27% on average — but only 41% of campaigns use them effectively. Effective signal use means broad enough to give the algorithm room to optimise (customer-data audiences of 5,000+ users) while specific enough to seed early learning. Customer data audiences (logged-in users, customer match) deliver the largest lift (38%); similar audiences and interest segments deliver smaller lifts.
PMax audience signals tell the algorithm who to look for — not who to target exclusively (the campaign will still bid on anyone the algorithm thinks will convert). The signals seed the early learning phase and accelerate the algorithm's optimisation.
Audience signal type impact on ROAS
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit. 17% of campaigns use no audience signals at all.
Customer Match is the highest-leverage signal
Customer Match-based PMax campaigns (uploaded list of existing customers) deliver 38% ROAS lift over no-signal campaigns. The mechanism: the algorithm uses the customer list to model conversion-likely users and surfaces similar audiences in serving — but isn't constrained to only those audiences.
Signal size matters
Customer Match audiences under 5,000 users deliver weaker lift than the 38% baseline. Optimal size: 10,000-100,000 users. Above 100,000 the signal becomes too broad to seed meaningful optimisation.
Common signal mistakes
- Too narrow — signals based on 500-user customer lists fail to provide the algorithm enough seed data.
- Too broad — using "all visitors in last 90 days" instead of "high-intent visitors" dilutes signal quality.
- Stale — Customer Match audiences not refreshed in 6+ months under-perform fresh audiences by 24%.
Three audience signal best practices. (1) Start with Customer Match if your list exceeds 10,000 users. (2) Layer in similar audiences for reach. (3) Refresh Customer Match lists monthly.
Channel Mix Within PMax
Within PMax, Search accounts for 47% of spend on average, YouTube 21%, Display 18%, Discovery 9%, Gmail 5%. Channel mix varies by industry: e-commerce skews higher Display + YouTube; B2B skews higher Search + Discovery. Search-heavy mix (60%+ Search) typically delivers higher ROAS; YouTube-heavy mix (30%+ YouTube) delivers higher reach + new-customer share but lower ROAS.
Median channel mix across 240 accounts
- Search
- YouTube
- Display
- Discovery
- Gmail
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit, channel mix via PMax Insights API.
Channel mix by industry
| Industry | Search | YouTube | Display | Discovery | Gmail |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| E-commerce / DTC | 38% | 28% | 22% | 8% | 4% |
| Retail | 41% | 24% | 21% | 9% | 5% |
| FMCG | 34% | 31% | 24% | 7% | 4% |
| Travel | 47% | 19% | 18% | 12% | 4% |
| B2B SaaS | 64% | 11% | 14% | 8% | 3% |
| Legal | 71% | 8% | 11% | 7% | 3% |
Search-heavy mix delivers ROAS
| Search share within PMax | Median ROAS |
|---|---|
| Under 30% Search | 1.8:1 |
| 30-50% Search | 2.4:1 |
| 50-70% Search | 3.1:1 |
| Over 70% Search | 3.6:1 |
YouTube-heavy PMax mix (30%+ YouTube spend) typically delivers 2-3x the new-customer share of Search-heavy mix but ROAS 30-40% lower. The trade-off: reach and acquisition vs efficiency.
New-Customer Acquisition Mode Adoption
New-customer acquisition mode adoption has reached 38% in 2026 — up from 11% in 2024. The feature lets PMax optimise for net new customers (excluding repeat purchasers) at either a "value bid" multiplier or "exclusively new" setting. Brands using value-bid mode deliver 47% net new customer share at 2.4:1 ROAS — typically the right trade for CAC-focused acquisition.
Adoption trajectory
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit. Adoption split: 78% Value Bid mode; 22% Exclusively New mode.
Impact on metrics
| Mode | Net new customer share | Aggregate ROAS | New-customer CPA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Off (default) | 31% | 2.7:1 | $42 (£33) |
| Value Bid | 47% | 2.4:1 | $37 (£29) |
| Exclusively New | 71% | 1.8:1 | $34 (£27) |
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit.
When to use which mode
- Off: brands optimising for aggregate revenue without CAC focus.
- Value Bid: brands with healthy LTV economics that want a CAC discount.
- Exclusively New: brands with severe new-vs-repeat allocation mismatch (e.g. retargeting cannibalising acquisition) or strict acquisition mandate.
New-customer mode requires Customer Match list upload of existing customers (the algorithm uses this as the "existing" definition). Brands without Customer Match setup cannot use the feature.
Should you enable new-customer mode? LTV:CAC over 3:1 + CAC focus → Value Bid. Severe retargeting cannibalisation → Exclusively New. Aggregate revenue focus → leave Off.
Brand Exclusion Adoption & Impact
Brand exclusion adoption in PMax has reached 64% in 2026 — up from 22% in 2024. The driver: brand-cannibalisation analysis showing PMax stealing branded clicks from cheap Search campaigns. Brands that exclude their own brand from PMax see 18-34% higher non-brand ROAS and reduced brand-search cost. PMax brand exclusion does not perfectly prevent brand serving — it reduces but doesn't eliminate brand impressions.
Brand exclusion adoption trajectory
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit.
Impact on cannibalisation
| Brand exclusion status | Brand-search PMax impression share | Non-brand PMax ROAS |
|---|---|---|
| No exclusion | 38% of impressions | 2.4:1 |
| Brand list excluded (Google native) | 17% | 2.8:1 |
| Brand list + competitor-list excluded | 14% | 3.2:1 |
| Brand + URL + competitor excluded (max blocking) | 11% | 3.4:1 |
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit. Brand exclusion doesn't perfectly prevent brand serving — 11-17% of impressions remain branded even with maximum exclusion — but non-brand ROAS lifts substantially.
Brand exclusion economics
For a brand spending $48,000 (£37,800) annually on Google Ads with 30% brand share:
- Without exclusion: $14,400 (£11,340) of PMax spend goes to brand clicks at PMax CPC of $1.20 (£0.94) — instead of Brand Search at $0.30 (£0.24).
- With exclusion: ~$5,000 (£3,940) freed up to serve non-brand demand at higher ROAS.
Net brand-search cost savings + non-brand efficiency lift typically delivers 12-18% aggregate Google Ads ROAS improvement.
PMax vs Standard Shopping Comparison
For the 84 clients running both PMax and standard Shopping campaigns, PMax delivers median ROAS 2.7:1 vs standard Shopping 3.4:1. PMax delivers higher impression volume and new-customer share; standard Shopping delivers higher per-click efficiency. Brands with strong feed management and PPC capability typically out-perform on standard Shopping; brands without that capability benefit more from PMax's automation.
Side-by-side comparison
| Metric | PMax | Standard Shopping |
|---|---|---|
| Median ROAS | 2.7:1 | 3.4:1 |
| Median CPC | $1.20 (£0.94) | $0.80 (£0.63) |
| Median CTR | 2.8% | 4.1% |
| Median CVR | 3.4% | 4.7% |
| New customer share | 47% | 28% |
| Setup time (hours) | 4 hours | 12 hours |
| Ongoing management hours / month | 4 hours | 12 hours |
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit, comparison sub-sample (n=84 clients).
PMax wins on automation; Standard Shopping wins on efficiency
PMax requires 1/3 the management time of standard Shopping while delivering 80% of the ROAS. For agencies or in-house teams with constrained capacity, the time-saving argument for PMax is compelling. For brands willing to invest in feed management and bid management, standard Shopping delivers measurably higher ROAS.
Hybrid strategy works
71% of the 84 clients in the comparison sample run PMax + standard Shopping in parallel — typically segmented by product profitability (high-margin SKUs on standard Shopping for control; low-margin SKUs on PMax for automation). Hybrid strategies deliver 14% higher portfolio ROAS than PMax-only strategies in our sample.
Conversion Goal Optimisation & Smart Bidding
PMax conversion goal optimisation works best with single conversion goals or tightly-weighted goal sets. Multi-goal PMax campaigns (4+ goals at equal weighting) under-perform single-goal campaigns by 28% on primary-goal ROAS. Target ROAS (tROAS) bidding works best for ecom with sufficient conversion volume; Maximize Conversion Value works better for sub-volume accounts. Smart Bidding requires 30+ conversions/month for stable optimisation.
Smart Bidding strategy comparison
| Strategy | % of campaigns using | Median ROAS | Best for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maximize Conversion Value | 41% | 2.6:1 | Sub-30-conversion accounts, new campaigns |
| Maximize Conversion Value + tROAS | 38% | 3.1:1 | 30+ conversion accounts, stable ROAS targets |
| Maximize Conversions | 14% | 1.9:1 | Lead-gen, sub-volume |
| Maximize Conversions + tCPA | 7% | 2.2:1 | Lead-gen with target CPA |
Source: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit.
Single vs multi-goal optimisation
| Goal configuration | Median ROAS on primary goal |
|---|---|
| Single goal | 3.2:1 |
| 2-3 goals (equal weight) | 2.7:1 |
| 4+ goals (equal weight) | 2.1:1 |
| 2-3 goals (weighted) | 2.9:1 |
Equal-weighting 4+ goals creates conflicting optimisation signals. The algorithm tries to satisfy all goals simultaneously and ends up suboptimal on each.
Conversion volume threshold
PMax with under 30 conversions/month under-performs the same campaign with 30+ conversions/month by 41% on ROAS. The algorithm needs conversion volume to learn. Brands under the threshold should either consolidate campaigns or use Maximize Conversion Value without tROAS targets until volume builds.
Reporting Transparency Frustrations
The top PMax reporting transparency frustrations in 2026: lack of keyword-level reporting (cited by 71% of practitioners as top-3 frustration), opaque channel mix without PMax Insights (54%), lack of placement-level reporting (47%), search term automation hiding (44%), and asset-level performance reporting limitations (38%).
Top PMax transparency frustrations
Source: Visionary Mass Marketer Survey 2026 (n=2,400).
Most-cited workarounds
- PMax Insights tab — used by 88% (Google's native solution)
- Custom segments in Reports — 54%
- 3rd-party tools (Optmyzr, Adriel, Adalysis) — 24%
- BigQuery export + custom analysis — 14%
- Direct API access via scripts — 7%
Search term reporting gap
PMax does not provide keyword-level search term reporting in the standard interface. Practitioners can see aggregated search categories in PMax Insights but not individual search terms. This is the single most-cited frustration and the largest gap between PMax and standard Search campaigns.
Setup Time & Cost Benchmarks
Median PMax setup time is 4 hours for an experienced PPC manager (10 hours for someone new to PMax). Outsourced setup typically costs $480-$1,200 (£378-£945) per campaign. Ongoing management requires 4 hours/month per active campaign — significantly less than standard Shopping (12 hours/month) but more than pure Smart Bidding campaigns.
Setup time benchmarks
| Setup phase | Median hours (experienced) | Median hours (new to PMax) |
|---|---|---|
| Asset creation / sourcing | 1.5 | 4.0 |
| Audience signal setup | 0.5 | 1.5 |
| Conversion goal configuration | 0.5 | 1.5 |
| Bid strategy & budget setup | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| Brand exclusion list setup | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| Feed integration | 0.5 | 1.0 |
| Total | 4 hours | 10 hours |
Source: Visionary Mass Marketer Survey 2026 (n=2,400).
Outsourced cost
Median outsourced setup cost: $480-$1,200 (£378-£945) per campaign. Top-quartile agency setup (with creative asset production) ranges $2,400-$4,800 (£1,890-£3,780).
Ongoing management hours
Median ongoing management: 4 hours/month per active PMax campaign. Activities: asset refresh (monthly), audience signal refresh (monthly), brand exclusion review (quarterly), bid strategy review (monthly), PMax Insights review (weekly).
Recommended budget vs actual
Google recommends minimum daily budgets ranging $20-$120 (£16-£94) depending on conversion goal. Campaigns running below the recommended minimum spend 60%+ longer in the learning phase and never fully optimise. Median actual daily PMax spend across our sample: $160 (£126).
PMax ROAS Forecaster
Enter your industry, AOV, PMax spend, asset quantity, audience signal, brand exclusion status, new-customer mode and Smart Bidding strategy. The forecaster projects your expected ROAS vs sector benchmark, estimates monthly revenue gap, and flags the three highest-leverage optimisations.
Expected ROAS
1.83:1
Sector benchmark: 3.40:1
Expected monthly revenue
$36,622 (£28,836)
From $20,000 (£15,748) of PMax spend.
Gap to sector benchmark
$31,378 (£24,707)
Monthly revenue left on the table.
Optimisation dimensions vs panel median
- You
- Median
Top 3 prioritised optimisations
- Push from 10 to 15 assets per asset group. — Projected ROAS lift 0.94:1. Additional monthly revenue: $18,866 (£14,855).
- Add a Customer Match audience signal (10,000+ users). — Customer Match-seeded campaigns lift ROAS by 38% over no-signal campaigns.
- Enable brand exclusion (Google brand list + URL). — Net Google Ads ROAS typically improves 12-18% by shifting brand clicks to cheaper Brand Search.
Indicative forecast based on the 240-account, $6M (£4.7M) PMax audit. For a free PMax audit and the full optimisation playbook, email press@visionary-marketing.co.uk.
Methodology
This study draws on three primary first-party data sources, all collected and analysed by Visionary Marketing in Q1 2026. No third-party data is referenced.
Source 1: Visionary 2026 PMax Audit. $6M (£4.7M) of client Performance Max spend across 240 accounts audited between 1 January and 28 February 2026. Captured: ROAS, conversion volume, asset quantity, audience signal configuration, channel mix (via PMax Insights API), brand exclusion status, new-customer acquisition mode usage, Smart Bidding strategy. Audit methodology: Google Ads API + manual PMax Insights review.
Source 2: Visionary Mass Marketer Survey 2026. 2,400-respondent survey fielded via Pollfish nationally representative panel between 1 and 28 February 2026. Used to measure adoption rates, frustrations, and setup/management time. Margin of error: ±2.0% at 95% confidence. Sample composition: 38% in-house, 47% agency-side, 15% freelance/consultant. PPC practitioner sub-cut: n=860.
Source 3: PMax vs Standard Shopping Comparison Sub-Study. 84 of the 240 audited accounts ran both PMax and standard Shopping campaigns concurrently. Cross-comparison used to isolate format-specific performance characteristics.
Sector weighting (240-account audit): B2B SaaS (8%), B2B services (8%), E-commerce / DTC (24%), Retail (12%), Professional services (8%), Financial services (8%), Healthcare (6%), Local services (8%), Legal (4%), Education (4%), Travel (4%), Manufacturing (4%), FMCG (2%).
Limitations. The 240-account audit skews mid-market and ecom-heavy. Enterprise PMax (Google Ads Manager Accounts with $1M+/£790K+ annual spend) under-represented. ROAS comparisons require consistent tracking — accounts with broken conversion tracking excluded from ROAS analysis (n=32 excluded). PMax Insights data is Google-provided and not independently verifiable.
For media enquiries, citations, or full dataset requests: press@visionary-marketing.co.uk.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is Performance Max worth it in 2026?
PMax accounts for 47% of all Google Ads spend in 2026 — most advertisers run it. But only 23% of accounts hit a 4:1 ROAS target. PMax delivers automation benefits (1/3 the management time of standard Shopping) and impression volume, but median ROAS (2.7:1) is lower than standard Shopping (3.4:1) for advertisers with strong feed management capability.
What's a good PMax ROAS?
Median PMax ROAS in 2026 is 2.7:1. Top quartile hits 5.2:1; bottom quartile 1.4:1. 'Good' varies by industry: e-commerce should target 3.4:1+; B2B SaaS 2.1:1+; legal 1.9:1+.
How many assets should a PMax campaign have?
15+ assets per asset group is optimal. Campaigns with 15+ assets outperform 5-asset campaigns by 2.3x on ROAS. Diminishing returns above 20 assets. Asset mix matters too: balance headlines, descriptions, images, and videos rather than over-supplying one asset type.
Do audience signals work in PMax?
Yes — audience signals lift PMax ROAS by 27% on average. Customer Match (uploaded customer list of 10,000+ users) delivers the largest lift (38%). 17% of campaigns use no audience signals — these campaigns underperform signal-using campaigns substantially.
Should I use brand exclusion in PMax?
Yes. 64% of advertisers now exclude their own brand from PMax. Exclusion prevents PMax from cannibalising cheaper brand-Search clicks and shifts spend toward non-brand acquisition. Net Google Ads ROAS typically improves by 12-18% with brand exclusion enabled.
What is new-customer acquisition mode in PMax?
A PMax feature that biases the algorithm toward net new customers. Value Bid mode bids higher for predicted new customers; Exclusively New mode excludes existing customers entirely. Adoption has reached 38% — up from 11% in 2024. Best for brands with CAC focus and healthy LTV economics.
Should I use PMax or standard Shopping?
For brands with strong feed management and PPC capability, standard Shopping delivers higher ROAS (3.4:1 vs 2.7:1) but requires 3x the management time. For brands without that capability, PMax is the more efficient choice. 71% of brands running both use a hybrid strategy.
How do I improve PMax ROAS?
The five highest-leverage optimisations: (1) increase assets per group to 15+ (2.3x lift); (2) implement Customer Match audience signals (38% lift); (3) enable brand exclusion (18-34% non-brand ROAS lift); (4) use tROAS bidding once you have 30+ conversions/month; (5) optimise for a single conversion goal rather than 4+ equal-weighted goals.
Where can I see the data behind this study?
Email press@visionary-marketing.co.uk to request the full 92-page Performance Max Statistics 2026 dataset, including per-sector cuts, asset performance models, and audience signal optimisation playbook.
When will this be updated?
Annually in Q1. The 2027 update will be published in April 2027.
