Bidding Strategies

Maximize Conversion Value vs Target Impression Share: Revenue or Rank

In short: Maximize Conversion Value prices auctions by predicted revenue and needs real conversion values to do it. Target Impression Share prices them by whatever a chosen position costs, up to a ceiling you set, with no conversion input at all. One buys the best orders it can find, the other buys presence.

By the AdFlint research team · Fact-checked against current Google and Meta platform behavior · Last reviewed July 2026

Maximize Conversion Value

Automated Google strategy that pursues the highest total conversion value within the budget, with an optional target ROAS to constrain efficiency.

It needs genuinely different values passed with your conversions, otherwise every conversion looks identical and it degenerates into Maximize Conversions. Ecommerce accounts and lead-gen accounts with scored leads use it to push toward high-value orders rather than cheap ones. The usual failure is a hard-coded value on the conversion action, which makes the value model meaningless while reports still display a confident ROAS figure.

Full definition

Target Impression Share

Sets bids to reach a chosen share of impressions at a chosen page position, bounded by a maximum CPC ceiling you define.

You pick absolute top, top, or anywhere on the results page plus a percentage, and Google bids whatever is needed up to your ceiling. It is a visibility strategy, used mostly for brand defense and specific competitive terms where presence matters more than efficiency. The mistake is running it on non-brand terms with a high ceiling, since it buys position whether or not those impressions ever convert.

Full definition

Side by side.

The differences that actually change what happens in your account.

	Maximize Conversion Value	Target Impression Share
What you name	A budget, and optionally a target ROAS.	A page position, a percentage, and a max CPC ceiling.
Data required	Accurate, varied conversion values.	None.
Bid basis	Predicted revenue from the auction.	Whatever reaching the chosen position costs.
Cost control	Budget plus the optional target ROAS.	The max CPC ceiling, which is the only lever.
Right home	Ecommerce and value scored lead gen carrying the revenue load.	Brand defense and a short list of must-win terms.
Failure mode	A hard-coded conversion value, which makes reported ROAS meaningless.	A loose ceiling on non-brand terms, buying impressions that never convert.

What actually separates them.

Value bidding will decline the top slot when the predicted order does not justify it; a position target buys the slot regardless of what the order is worth.

Target impression share reads no conversion data, so it cannot distinguish your best selling product term from a term that has never produced revenue.

The ceiling is the only spend control on a position target, whereas value bidding is bounded by budget and by the target ROAS if one is set.

Value bidding concentrates spend where revenue is predicted, which often means giving up prominence on high traffic terms that convert poorly.

You can measure impression share while running value bidding, so wanting to know your visibility is not a reason to buy it with a bid strategy.

Which one should you use?

Use Maximize Conversion Value when

Real transaction values reach the account and vary meaningfully.
The campaign is judged on revenue and return rather than on presence.
Product margins differ enough that some auctions genuinely deserve higher bids.
You want budget to follow predicted order size rather than page position.

Use Target Impression Share when

A competitor is bidding on your brand name and absence is costly.
A short list of high stakes commercial terms where missing the impression loses the deal.
A launch or event window where share of voice is the objective.
You have set a deliberate max CPC ceiling and will monitor spend closely.

Common questions.

Should top selling product terms use a position target?

Rarely. Value bidding already bids up on those auctions when it predicts a large order, and it does so per auction rather than uniformly. A position target applies the same determination to every query in the campaign, so it will overpay on the low value tail while adding little on the terms that were already winning.

My value campaign is losing top of page share. Is that a problem?

Not by itself. Value bidding gives up prominence on auctions where predicted revenue does not justify the price, which is the intended trade. Investigate only if impression share lost to rank is climbing on terms that do produce revenue, which usually means the target ROAS is set higher than the account can support.

Can I protect brand terms without giving up value bidding elsewhere?

Yes, by separating them into their own campaign. Brand terms on a position target with a firm ceiling, non-brand on value bidding. This also keeps brand conversions, which are cheap and frequent, from distorting what the value model learns about the auctions that actually need judgment.

Or stop choosing between them.

AdFlint picks the setting, writes the ads, and keeps optimizing inside the Google and Meta accounts you already own.

Try AdFlint free See how it works

Related comparisons

All comparisons