Best Strategy for Testing New Creatives in Unity Ads & Google Ads?

[Rehan Naveen Perera]

I'm curious about how other UA managers approach creative testing, particularly on Unity Ads and Google Ads.

When you have an existing campaign that's already performing well, what's your preferred strategy for introducing new creatives?

• Do you add the new creatives directly into the existing campaign and let the platform optimize?
• Or do you create a separate campaign (targeting the same audience) with a dedicated test budget, validate the creatives there, and only move the winners into the main campaign?

 

[davamosk]

Validating creatives in Google UAC is kind of odd as Google takes store elements as part of the final ad so the numbers you see on the creative level are just incomplete if you compare vs the campaign level.

Because of that, I normally prefer updating low performing creatives within the same ad group if and when the creatives are related to that ad group ofc or create a new ad group within the same campaign if the creatives are attacking a different audience.

I haven't run unity in a while but I think @UA-Goblin can help

 

[UA-Goblin]

Thanks @davamosk for the mention

For UAC I use a very similar approach to davamosk's one as the way they test campaigns is really unpredictable and it becomes tricky to clearly spot and isolate winners.

For Unity, from what I have experienced, the platform is quite capable of finding winners quickly enough, and when it does it redirects there the vast majority of your spend. For this reason, I tend to always rotate about 8 different concepts, pause quickly what doesn't perform (usually it's flagged with an "attention" icon) and test everything together. Of course it depends on the kind of campaign types you run, but this approach tends to work well with ROAS-based ones. You can still run a set of "best performing assets" in a separate campaign, but that is not always the best approach as they might die quickly as you saturate the audience with the same creatives.

Hope this helps

 

[Rehan Naveen Perera]

Thanks @davamosk for the mention

For UAC I use a very similar approach to davamosk's one as the way they test campaigns is really unpredictable and it becomes tricky to clearly spot and isolate winners.

For Unity, from what I have experienced, the platform is quite capable of finding winners quickly enough, and when it does it redirects there the vast majority of your spend. For this reason, I tend to always rotate about 8 different concepts, pause quickly what doesn't perform (usually it's flagged with an "attention" icon) and test everything together. Of course it depends on the kind of campaign types you run, but this approach tends to work well with ROAS-based ones. You can still run a set of "best performing assets" in a separate campaign, but that is not always the best approach as they might die quickly as you saturate the audience with the same creatives.

Hope this helps

Thank you soo much guys

 

[Rehan Naveen Perera]

Validating creatives in Google UAC is kind of odd as Google takes store elements as part of the final ad so the numbers you see on the creative level are just incomplete if you compare vs the campaign level.

Because of that, I normally prefer updating low performing creatives within the same ad group if and when the creatives are related to that ad group ofc or create a new ad group within the same campaign if the creatives are attacking a different audience.

I haven't run unity in a while but I think @UA-Goblin can help

Thanks