Yes, professionals use RSAs — they're the only standard search ad type available since Google retired Expanded Text Ads in 2022. The practitioners who struggle with them load weak, loosely related headlines and blame the algorithm. Those who succeed treat RSAs as an optimization layer: they supply tightly themed, high-quality creative inputs, use pinning strategically, and monitor actual asset performance rather than Ad Strength scores.
Responsive Search Ads let you supply up to 15 headlines and 4 descriptions; Google's machine learning then tests combinations in real time, adapting to the query, device, location, time of day, and audience signals for each auction. [1] Skepticism is fair — handing copy to an algorithm feels like losing control. But RSAs are not a replacement for creative strategy; they are an optimization layer on top of it. The algorithm multiplies the quality of your inputs, which means weak copy produces weak results at scale, while strong, theme-coherent inputs compound.
This question came up in the r/PPC community, and the practitioner consensus is consistent: yes, pros use RSAs, but not the way Google's default prompts encourage. The advertisers who hate them are typically those who either treat them as set-it-and-forget-it tools or stuff them with loosely related headlines and expect the algorithm to compensate.
Google generates headline and description combinations in real time based on contextual signals, then assigns performance ratings to individual assets over time. [1] Assets receive ratings of Learning, Low, Good, or Best, reflecting how each contributes to click-through and conversion performance relative to other assets in the same ad. [2] Separately, Google surfaces an Ad Strength score — Poor through Excellent — which measures asset diversity and quantity, not actual performance quality. [2]
You can override the algorithm's freedom by pinning headlines or descriptions to specific positions (Position 1, 2, or 3). A pinned asset always appears in that position, regardless of what else Google would have chosen. [1] This is the primary mechanism for maintaining creative control within the RSA format — and it is significantly underused in most accounts. For a deeper look at the trade-offs, see the practitioner discussion on pinned vs. unpinned headlines.
---Every headline in an RSA should belong to the same conceptual universe as the ad group's theme — not a grab-bag of brand claims pulled from different campaigns. When unrelated headlines combine, the resulting ad copy is incoherent and CTR suffers.
In accounts I manage, I organize headlines across three functional categories:
For descriptions, write each one so it makes complete sense whether it appears alone or alongside another. Google may show one or two descriptions depending on the format, and the combination is not guaranteed. [1] Each description should contain a primary benefit, a supporting detail, and a call-to-action — self-contained, not reliant on the other description to complete the thought.
For detailed guidance on testing all 15 headlines effectively, see how practitioners approach full RSA asset testing. You can also draft and validate headlines before launch using the Google Ads copy builder.
---Pinning is appropriate when creative control is more valuable than algorithmic freedom — for brand compliance, legal requirements, or must-show claims. Pin to Position 1 for your brand name or primary USP; leave Positions 2 and 3 open for rotation unless compliance demands otherwise.
The trade-off: pinning too many assets effectively turns your RSA into a static ad with extra steps. A typical ceiling in non-brand campaigns is no more than two pinned assets at a time. For a practitioner breakdown of pinning strategy on non-brand campaigns, see this discussion on non-brand RSA pinning.
---Running 2–3 RSAs per ad group with meaningfully different creative angles outperforms a single RSA, because it lets Google weight toward the best-performing ad while you maintain genuinely distinct creative hypotheses. The key is that each RSA should represent a different messaging strategy — not just swapped headlines.
| RSA Variant | Primary Angle | Best For |
|---|---|---|
| RSA #1 | Price / ROI focused | Bottom-funnel, high-intent queries |
| RSA #2 | Feature / capability focused | Mid-funnel, comparison shoppers |
| RSA #3 | Trust / social proof focused | New audiences, brand-awareness queries |
With multiple RSAs active, Google will automatically increase serving weight toward whichever ad performs best over time — giving you machine-learning optimization without concentrating all creative risk in a single ad. For current changes to how Google reports on RSA headline performance, see the rollout of RSA headline-level reporting.
---RSAs are not universally superior in every scenario — they need data to optimize, and in low-volume accounts the algorithm's advantage narrows considerably.
In accounts generating fewer than 30 conversions per month, the algorithm lacks enough signal to meaningfully differentiate between asset combinations. In these cases, use heavy pinning to maintain message control and treat the RSA more like a structured static ad. RSAs tend to show their largest performance advantages in campaigns with >50 conversions per month at the campaign level, where the algorithm has sufficient conversion data to optimize.
In healthcare, legal, and financial services, freely mixing headlines can create legally problematic combinations. Use aggressive pinning, audit the Combinations Report before and after launch, and involve compliance review before any RSA goes live.
The Combinations Report is the most underused RSA diagnostic tool available. To access it: navigate to Ads & Assets, click a specific RSA, click "View asset details," and select the Combinations tab. This shows the actual headline and description pairings being served, along with impression data — letting you catch incoherent combinations and identify which value-prop pairings resonate. [1]
For more on reading individual asset performance data, see how practitioners approach individual headline reporting for RSAs. You can also run a quick audit of your existing RSA setup with Buddy, the AI Google Ads agent.
---Expanded Text Ads gave advertisers complete control over the exact copy users saw. RSAs trade some of that control for real-time adaptability across signals no static ad could account for. The comparison is now largely academic — Google retired ETAs in June 2022, and they can no longer be created or edited. RSAs are the only standard search ad type available. [3]
| Factor | Expanded Text Ads (retired) | Responsive Search Ads |
|---|---|---|
| Creative control | Complete | Partial (pinning available) |
| Testing efficiency | Manual A/B, slow | Automated, faster with data volume |
| Performance at scale | Limited by static combinations | Improves with conversion data |
| Low-traffic ad groups | Predictable | Inconsistent without sufficient data |
| Compliance / legal | Preferred (was) | Workable with pinning |
| Auction adaptability | None | High |
The practical question is no longer which format to choose — it is how to use RSAs as effectively as possible. For a broader look at ad copy and creative strategy, explore all Ad Copy & Creative answers on AHMEEGO.
---No. Ad Strength measures asset diversity and quantity — it is a prompt to add more variety, not a performance signal. [2] In practice, an RSA with "Good" Ad Strength and tightly themed messaging frequently outperforms an "Excellent"-scored RSA with scattered, generic headlines. Monitor individual asset ratings and conversion performance instead of optimizing for the Ad Strength score itself.
Aim for 10–15 headlines. Fewer than 10 limits the algorithm's ability to find winning combinations; 15 is the maximum. [1] Quality and thematic coherence matter more than hitting the maximum — 12 tightly relevant headlines will outperform 15 generic ones. Organize them across keyword-anchored, value-proposition, and CTA categories to ensure the algorithm has varied but coherent material to test.
No. Google retired Expanded Text Ads in June 2022. Any ETAs already running before that date continued serving, but they can no longer be created or edited. [3] RSAs are the only standard search ad format available for new campaigns. If you need tight copy control — for legal or compliance reasons — use pinning within RSAs rather than trying to replicate ETAs.
Pin the assets where free combination creates legal or brand risk, but avoid pinning everything. Pinning all positions essentially removes the algorithmic advantage of the RSA format entirely. A practical approach is to pin the highest-risk asset (typically a brand name or regulated claim) to Position 1 and allow Positions 2 and 3 to rotate from a pre-vetted, compliance-reviewed pool of headlines.
Use two reports: the individual asset performance ratings (Learning, Low, Good, Best) available in the ad's asset detail view, and the Combinations Report, which shows the specific headline-and-description pairings Google is serving most frequently along with impression data. [1] Pause assets rated "Low" after 60+ days and use high-impression combinations to inform landing page copy and broader creative strategy.
RSA asset quality influences expected click-through rate and ad relevance — two of the three components Google uses to calculate Quality Score. [4] Tightly themed headlines that closely match user intent improve ad relevance, while higher expected CTR from well-tested combinations contributes to a stronger Quality Score over time. Ad Strength itself is not a Quality Score input.
More answers in this topic: Ad Copy & Creative
