PPC Case Study: How to Maintain Profitability in Premium eCommerce and Reach a 397% ROAS in 90 Days with Google Performance Max
eCommerce in the premium home décor niche
– Business scaling through paid search advertising
November, 2025 - present day
USA
Challenges of the Project
The client came to our company with a project in the premium home décor niche in the U.S. market. One Google Performance Max campaign had already been launched before our involvement. In this segment, the effectiveness of this channel depends heavily on traffic quality and the accuracy of the optimization strategy, since the average order value is high.
At the start of the project, we identified a gap between how the results were being presented to the client and the actual account dynamics: real performance was gradually declining. For that reason, the first stage focused on auditing and stabilizing the campaign, and only after that did we move on to growth.
Project Analytics
The client came to us not just to maintain Google Ads, but to bring order to the account, stabilize campaign performance, and return advertising to predictable profitability.
At the start of the project, the main Google Performance Max campaign was already running, but the actual performance trend was deteriorating. Previous communication with the client did not reflect the full picture: the account had periods of declining efficiency, and ROAS was not staying at the desired level.
Initial results and objective
In October, before our work began, the campaign was showing the following results:
- Spend: $3,546.83;
- Revenue: $11,131.08;
- Conversions: 40.13;
- ROAS: 2.79;
- CPA: $88.39.
For premium eCommerce with a high average order value, this meant the channel was operating below its potential: despite relatively high spend, the number of conversions remained limited, while the acquisition cost was too high.
The client’s request was to:
- understand why performance was declining;
- stabilize the account;
- improve advertising profitability;
- scale.
So the first objective was not “scaling at any cost,” but regaining control over traffic quality and channel profitability in Google Ads.
Audit and key issues
First, we conducted an audit of the Performance campaigns. It showed that the account was losing efficiency: in October, ROAS had dropped to 2.85–3.14, CPA had increased, and the number of conversions had declined. At the same time, there was almost no systematic optimization in place.
The main issue was that the budget continued to be spent on ineffective products: the account contained 32+ SKUs with 20+ clicks and no conversions. In addition, we identified weak performance in the Search campaign, feed errors, and overly broad geo-targeting.
That is why the first stage was not an attempt to scale advertising, but to clean up the account, stabilize the campaigns, and reallocate the budget toward what was actually generating sales.
First positive effects
As early as November, after we began working on the account, performance started to improve:
| Metric | Before November | In November | Result |
| Spend (USD) | 3,546.83 | 3,723.55 | +176.72, up 5% |
| Conversions | 40.13 | 81.94 | increased 2.04x |
| Revenue (USD) | 11,131.08 | 15,664.40 | +4,533.32 |
| ROAS | 3.14 | 4.21 | +34.1% |
| CPA (USD) | 88.39 | 45.44 | -48.6% |
This was the first signal that after the audit and the shift in approach, the campaign was moving in the right direction: at nearly the same level of spend, the account started generating more conversions, higher revenue, and stronger return on ad spend.
Peak season specifics
December was a strong seasonal period for premium home décor, but the high result was not driven by demand alone. Before the season began, we identified risks related to traffic quality, demand structure, and the performance of individual products, so we focused on campaign preparation: adjusted the bidding approach, cleaned up non-target traffic, and strengthened the quality of signals.
As a result, the campaign delivered the following performance in December:
- Ad spend: $3,941.98;
- Conversion value: $32,741.45;
- ROAS: 831%;
- Conversions: 119.93.
This allows us to view the December result not as a random seasonal spike, but as the outcome of proper account preparation for a period of high demand.
Team actions
1. Testing optimization models
While working on the campaign, we tested different optimization approaches depending on the goals of each period and the quality of signals in the account.
At certain stages, we used Maximize Conversions when the goal was to strengthen signal volume and give the algorithm more data to learn from. During periods when the priority shifted from the number of orders to their value, the focus moved to Maximize Conversion Value.
Ultimately, the core strategy became Maximize Conversion Value with Target ROAS, because this approach best matched the project’s objective: maintaining profitability in premium eCommerce while scaling sales without losing efficiency.
We moved away from a conversion-volume-only approach as the main strategy, since for a high-ticket catalog the critical KPI was not simply the number of orders, but their actual business value.
2. Working with Target ROAS
We used Target ROAS as a profitability control tool once the campaign had accumulated a sufficient volume of high-quality signals. This made it possible to shift the focus from the number of conversions alone to their actual value for the business.
For premium eCommerce, this is critical: if you lock in a high tROAS too early, the campaign starts narrowing its reach and loses volume. That is why we did not apply tROAS “by default.” We introduced it only when the account had already reached a sufficient level of stability and profitability control became the main priority.
3. Adding negative keywords
One of the dedicated optimization areas was cleaning up search demand.
During the work, we aggressively refined campaigns through negative keywords to reduce the share of non-target traffic and limit impressions for queries that were not generating valuable conversions. This helped reduce the share of non-target traffic by 27%.
4. Cleaning up placements
During placement analysis, we found that at least 10% of impressions were coming from clearly irrelevant placements — mobile apps, gaming placements, and random content sites. These impressions did not match the premium home décor niche and created a risk of attracting low-quality traffic, so placement cleanup became one of the optimization priorities.
For Performance Max, this is an important practical layer of control: even when the campaign remains automated, its results still depend directly on how clean and useful the incoming traffic is.
5. Adapting to seasonality
During stronger periods, the goal was not just to “have traffic,” but to monetize existing demand as effectively as possible without sacrificing quality. During weaker periods, the priority was to maintain control over profitability and avoid spending budget on less relevant demand.
This approach made it possible not only to capture the seasonal spike, but to turn it into a real business advantage.
Results
Within 90 days after the audit, stabilization, and further campaign optimization, we were able to bring the account to a controlled level of performance in premium eCommerce. To illustrate this, let’s look at a comparison table:
| Metric | Before | After |
| Spend | $3,546.83 | $11,296.78 |
| Revenue | $11,131.08 | $44,878.32 |
| Conversions | 40.13 | 186 |
| Average ROAS | 2.79 | 3.97 |
| Average CPA | $88.39 | $60.74 |
The campaign delivered its strongest result in December, when, supported by seasonal demand and the optimization work carried out, ROAS reached 8.31.
Conclusion
In premium eCommerce with a high average order value, results are not driven by traffic volume or budget alone. The key factors are traffic quality, the right optimization strategy, and the campaign’s ability to monetize demand during strong periods.
In this case, growth was not the result of a “lucky season,” but of the work done after the audit: the account was first stabilized, cleared of weak traffic, and the strategies were adjusted to match the real economics of the project. With that foundation in place, the campaign was then able to capitalize on seasonal demand more effectively and reach a higher ROAS level.
