Rework the Placements tab so placement performance is visible next to match type
Dmitry Kucherov
Description
Ads Insights > Performance > Placements already breaks each campaign into Top of Search, Rest of Search and Product Pages rows, and placement values can be edited there directly. The data exists, but it is hard to act on:
The tab reads as an adjustment screen rather than a reporting screen. Users land on it, see Placement and Placement value columns, and conclude there are no stats. The performance metrics are not where the eye lands.
Placement performance cannot be cross-referenced with match type. Users who structure campaigns around match type need to see how a given match type performs at each placement, and today that means comparing across views or exporting.
There is no filter path from an ASIN or campaign type straight to its placement breakdown.
Requested changes:
- Surface the core metrics (impressions, clicks, CTR, spend, orders, conversion, CPC, ACOS) prominently on the Placements tab rather than trailing the adjustment columns
- Allow the placement breakdown to be viewed within, or filtered alongside, the Match Types view
- Add ASIN and campaign type filtering to the placement view, consistent with how other Performance views filter
Use case
Placement modifiers get set without users being confident they are reading the placement's actual performance, because the numbers are not surfaced where the decision is made.
A concrete example from a seller managing $200k monthly spend: on an exact match campaign, Top of Search converted at 23 percent with 18 percent ACOS, while Rest of Search converted at 13 percent with 20 percent ACOS. Top of Search converts far better and sits below the ACOS target, so there is roughly 2 points of headroom to bid that placement more aggressively, take more volume, and hold overall campaign performance flat.
He built that comparison in an external spreadsheet rather than in Scale Insights, despite the platform already holding the data, because getting match type and placement into one view was easier outside the tool. That is the gap worth closing: the data is there, the analysis path is not.