Joshua Tree Experts
Google Ads Portfolio Audit
Full franchise portfolio under the Joshua Tree Experts MCC.
Review Window
Peak Season to Date
Apr 1 to Jun 24 · about 85 days
Scope
28 Location Accounts
MCC · 28 location accounts
Channel Reviewed
Google Ads
Across the full MCC
The franchise has a strong foundation. Tracking is consistent and intentional across locations, with every active account reporting its primary conversions through a unified pipeline. The wide differences in cost per lead between markets are real and market driven, not measurement gaps. The biggest levers are competitive, not structural. Most accounts are limited by ad rank rather than budget, ad coverage is thin across the board, and a small number of markets need a landing page and competition review. Two accounts, Potomac Valley and Richmond, are wired correctly but reporting almost nothing, which points to a lead capture issue worth chasing down.
Overall Takeaway
“Tracking is solid. Chase the lead capture issue on Potomac Valley and Richmond, revisit the strong performer that went dark mid season, and treat the expensive markets as landing page and competition work.”
Scope and Method
Every active location account under the MCC, scored against the benchmark
This audit looks at the full franchise, not a single market. We reviewed every active location account under the MCC, pulled live campaign performance, impression share, bidding configuration, ad structure, negative keyword coverage, and the conversion tracking setup in each account, then compared every location against the best performing account as a benchmark.
Regional context
A note on Google Ads and regional competition. Cost per lead is set largely by local competition and click prices in each metro. Two accounts built identically will not perform identically if one sits in a low competition market and the other in a saturated one. This audit separates the gaps that are fixable account side from the gaps that are a function of the local market.
01 · Executive Summary
Strong foundation. Performance varies by market, not by build.
Strong, Consistent Foundation
Campaign builds are consistent across the 28 location accounts. Ad theming, negative keyword coverage, and ad strength are broadly sound. The best account runs a $53 cost per conversion as a benchmark.
Tracking Is Consistent Across the Portfolio
Every active account reports its primary conversions through a unified pipeline. The earlier finding that 11 accounts had incomplete tracking has been corrected after a trace of the actual lead pipeline.
Performance Varies by Market, Not by Build
Because tracking is consistent, the spread in cost per lead reflects local competition, landing page conversion rate, and how much volume each account gives the bidding system to learn from.
Dark Accounts Mid Season
Four accounts have not spent at all this season. Two more went quiet in the last 30 days, including Denver North, which had been running at an $81 cost per conversion before it stopped.
02 · Portfolio Performance Snapshot
Every active location, scored against the benchmark.
Peak season to date, April 1 to June 24, about 85 days. Tracking column shows whether the account has the full conversion tracking stack or a partial one.
| Account | Spend | Conv. | CPA | Search IS | Lost to Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| LV & BXMT, PA· Benchmark | $14,322 | 271 | $53 | 24% | 67% |
| Fort Bend-Cypress, TX | $10,014 | 55 | $182 | 19% | 70% |
| Chicago North Shore | $6,759 | 57 | $119 | 21% | 69% |
| Indianapolis North, IN | $6,255 | 52 | $120 | 26% | 64% |
| Charlotte, NC | $6,136 | 57 | $108 | 15% | 77% |
| Denver South, CO | $5,881 | 51 | $115 | 18% | 63% |
| Greater North Atlanta, GA | $5,793 | 16 | $362 | 19% | 69% |
| Fairfield County, CT | $5,725 | 11 | $520 | 24% | 67% |
| Cranberry Township | $5,545 | 35 | $158 | 29% | 55% |
| Raleigh-Cary, NC | $4,924 | 39 | $126 | 23% | 67% |
| Greater West Houston, TX | $4,643 | 27 | $172 | 12% | 79% |
| Dallas Central, TX | $4,333 | 34 | $127 | 16% | 80% |
| Jacksonville South, FL· Dark in last 30 days | $4,124 | 11 | $375 | 28% | 57% |
| Richmond, VA | $3,581 | 18 | $199 | 21% | 60% |
| Salt Lake City, UT | $3,044 | 15 | $203 | 21% | 61% |
| Piscataway, NJ | $3,038 | 18 | $169 | 18% | 65% |
| Morristown, NJ | $2,976 | 14 | $213 | 18% | 73% |
| Potomac Valley | $2,861 | 1 | $2,861 | 30% | 64% |
| Birmingham, AL | $2,686 | 17 | $158 | 34% | 53% |
| North Dallas, TX | $2,544 | 14 | $182 | 19% | 74% |
| Greater North Tampa Bay, FL | $2,248 | 16 | $141 | 30% | 54% |
| Charlotte North, NC | $2,228 | 9 | $252 | 16% | 58% |
| Denver North, CO· Dark in last 30 days | $2,033 | 25 | $81 | 14% | 85% |
| Greater Little Rock, AR | $1,330 | 21 | $63 | 23% | 70% |
Jacksonville South and Denver North spent earlier in the season but went dark in the last 30 days.
Dark for the entire season (no spend since April 1)
Portfolio totals (April 1 to June 24): about $113,000 in spend, roughly a $40,000 per month run rate. Blended cost per conversion about $128, but that single number hides the split shown in the next section.
03 · Core Finding
How conversion tracking actually works.
Core Finding
The setup. Conversion tracking across this portfolio is consistent and intentional. It runs through a custom lead pipeline (Kestra) and is set up the same way across the franchise.
How leads are counted. Every account reports leads to Google Ads through a single primary conversion, Qualified Lead, which the pipeline uploads by matching the lead back to its Google click. This is wired into 27 of the 28 accounts. On top of that, Google's native Calls from ads counts calls placed directly from the ad, so both forms and calls are represented. Older Appointment and Proposal events on a subset of accounts are secondary and not the live signal.
The takeaway. There is no portfolio wide measurement gap. Because tracking is consistent, the wide differences in cost per lead between markets are real performance differences, not artifacts of some accounts counting leads that others miss.
Our take
Two narrow items remain. The inbound call batch process built as a safety net for unlogged calls is currently producing nothing and should be activated or verified. And Potomac Valley and Richmond are wired correctly but reporting almost nothing, which points upstream to lead capture or click ID matching on those two accounts specifically.
04 · Why Uniform Setup Will Not Fix Everything
Structure is already consistent. The remaining lever is market dynamics.
Why Uniform Setup Will Not Fix Everything
We scored every account on campaign structure: ad group ad depth, ad strength, negative keyword coverage, brand campaign presence, and bidding strategy. Negative keywords are broadly applied, ad strength is healthy almost everywhere, and the build patterns match. The one structural weakness, thin ad coverage with usually a single responsive search ad per ad group, is present everywhere including the benchmark account. More tellingly, the structure score does not predict performance. Accounts that most resemble the benchmark on paper are not cheaper. Campaign structure is largely solved across the franchise. What is left is local market dynamics like competition and click prices, and landing page conversion rate, which we can address but cannot change overnight.
Blueprint Match vs Median CPA
| Match | Accts | Median CPA |
|---|---|---|
| High match (5 to 6 of 6) | 6 | $182 |
| Medium match (3 to 4) | 15 | $158 |
| Low match (0 to 2) | 3 | $127 |
05 · Why Performance Varies by Market
With tracking consistent, the spread in cost per lead reflects the markets themselves.
Market driven, not measurement driven
Google Ads is priced by local competition and click costs, so an account in a saturated metro will run a higher cost per lead than one in a lighter market even with an identical build. With the pipeline confirmed as consistent, the differences are driven by local competition, landing page conversion rate, and how much conversion volume each account gives the bidding system to learn from. The accounts that look expensive need a market and landing page review, not a tracking fix or a structural rebuild.
Expensive markets
Candidates for landing page and competition review
| Account | CPA |
|---|---|
| Fairfield County, CT | $520 |
| Greater North Atlanta, GA | $362 |
| Charlotte North, NC | $252 |
| Morristown, NJ | $213 |
| Salt Lake City, UT | $203 |
| North Dallas, TX | $182 |
| Greater West Houston, TX | $172 |
06 · Accounts Spending Into Near Zero Conversions
Two accounts are spending real money while recording almost nothing.
Near zero
Potomac Valley
About $2,861 across peak season for a single recorded conversion, and zero in the last 30 days.
This account is wired correctly into the unified conversion pipeline, so this is not a tracking configuration gap. The cause is upstream, either very few logged leads from this market or the Google click ID not being captured and matched on the leads they do get. Needs a hands on check of lead capture and click ID matching.
Near zero
Richmond, VA
A literal zero in the last 30 days.
Richmond is wired into the conversion pipeline the same as the rest of the portfolio. It logged some conversions earlier in the season and almost none in the last 30 days. Same upstream check as Potomac Valley: lead capture and click ID matching on the leads this market is generating.
Both are wired into the unified conversion pipeline the same as the rest of the portfolio, so this is not a tracking configuration gap. The cause is upstream on lead capture and Google click ID matching. These two should be the first stop.
07 · Dormant and Recently Switched Off
Four accounts dark all season. Two more went quiet mid season.
| Account | Status | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Austin Greater West | Dark all season | No spend since April 1 |
| Collin County, TX | Dark all season | No spend since April 1 |
| Greater West Austin, TX | Dark all season | No spend since April 1 |
| West Chester, PA | Dark all season | No spend since April 1 |
| Denver North, CO | Recently dark | $2,033 at an $81 CPA before stopping. Strong performer switched off mid season. |
| Jacksonville South, FL | Recently dark | $4,124 spent earlier in the season, quiet in the last 30 days. |
Denver North is the notable one. It spent about $2,033 at an $81 cost per conversion, among the best in the portfolio, and is now dark. Turning off a strong performer in the middle of peak season is unusual and worth a direct question.
08 · Portfolio Wide Notes
Three patterns that hold across nearly every account.
Impression share is limited by ad rank, not budget
Across nearly every account, more than half of available impression share is lost to rank rather than budget, often 60 to 85 percent. Adding budget will not buy more visibility in most accounts. The lever is bids, quality, and landing pages.
Ad coverage is thin everywhere
Most live ad groups run a single responsive search ad. Building two to three per ad group across the portfolio gives the system more to optimize and is a low effort, universal gain.
Bidding strategy is inconsistent
Several lead-gen campaigns run on Max Clicks, which buys traffic rather than booked jobs and tends to produce weak conversion outcomes. These should move to a conversion based strategy.
09 · Prioritized Recommendations
Eight moves, sequenced by leverage.
Investigate lead capture and Google click-ID matching on Potomac Valley and Richmond
Both accounts are wired correctly into the unified conversion pipeline but report almost nothing. The cause is upstream: either those markets are generating very few logged leads, or the Google click ID is not being captured and matched on the leads they do get. This is the single most concrete tracking related action item in the audit.
Activate or verify the inbound-call batch process
A call only becomes a counted conversion when it is logged downstream as a lead. A batch process is built to catch unlogged calls as a safety net, but it is currently producing nothing. Activating or verifying it would tighten call measurement across the portfolio.
Review the recently darkened accounts, especially Denver North
Denver North was running at an $81 cost per conversion, among the best in the portfolio, and is now dark. Turning off a strong performer in the middle of peak season needs an explanation. Jacksonville also went quiet and is worth a direct check.
Move Max Clicks lead-gen campaigns to conversion-based bidding
Several lead-gen campaigns run on Max Clicks, which buys traffic rather than booked jobs and tends to produce weak conversion outcomes. With tracking consistent across the portfolio, these should move to a conversion based strategy.
Add two to three responsive search ads per ad group portfolio wide
Most live ad groups run a single responsive search ad, including the benchmark account. Adding two to three per ad group gives the system more to optimize and is a low effort, universal gain.
Run a landing page and local market review on the expensive markets
Fairfield County, Greater North Atlanta, Charlotte North, Morristown, Salt Lake City, North Dallas, and Greater West Houston have consistent tracking and clean structure. Their gap is not structural or measurement. The next lever is landing page conversion rate and a market level read on competition and click prices.
Set per market performance expectations
A single cost per lead benchmark across all 28 markets is misleading. Group locations by competitiveness and target accordingly. Cloning the benchmark account onto a high competition market will not reproduce its $53 CPA.
Optional housekeeping on dormant conversion actions
Retire or relabel the dormant CallRail, Appointment, and Proposal conversion actions so account goals reflect what is actually live. Also fix the apparent mislabel between the two Austin accounts in the pipeline config, where one is missing from the qualified lead list. Both Austin accounts are essentially inactive, so this is low priority.
10 · The Account Ownership Question
A fair question about attention, not build quality.
The Account Ownership Question
A fair question about attention and maintenance, not build quality
The campaign builds are consistent, which speaks well of the original setup. But the picture across the portfolio raises a fair question about who is managing the program now and how evenly. A strong performer was switched off during peak season, two accounts are quietly spending into near zero recorded conversions, and the inbound call safety net process is built but not producing. None of those are build quality problems. They are attention and maintenance problems, which is worth raising directly with the vendor.
11 · Next Step
Let's walk through this together.
Let's Talk
Thank you for reading.
Recommended next step: a 60 minute review to walk through the portfolio findings, the tracking rollout, the laggard profiles, and what an engagement could look like across all 28 locations.
Schedule a meeting with Craft Digital