Dead Clever Marketing

CommonWealth One — Audit & Approvals

That code is not right
Press Enter to continue
Prepared for Dead Clever Marketing · Confidential

CommonWealth One FCU
Google Ads Audit & Approval Sheet

July 25, 2026  ·  Account 730-631-9113  ·  Windows: last 90 days (Apr 26 to Jul 25); June billing pause traced Apr 1 to Jul 24
Nothing has been changed. This audit was performed read-only. Every item below is a proposal. Check the boxes you approve, then use the button at the bottom to send the approval email (or the text option). Per our agreement, the checkboxes themselves are not approval; your sent message is the written approval, and changes begin only after it arrives.

How we count: every cost figure here divides spend by ONE specific tracked outcome: a "tracked call" is a call of 60 seconds or longer; an "application" is an actual submitted application. We never quote the platform's blended "cost per conversion," which averages phone calls and funded loans as equal units and currently reads a flattering $35 while the true cost per application is $355. With us, you will always know exactly what a number counts.

The five findings that matter

Every keyword runs on broad match, without the guardrails broad match needs

$6,000 of proven waste over 90 days, and with half the spend hidden from view, the true figure is likely closer to $4,000 a month

All 44 active keywords ($24,199 of 90-day spend) are broad match, including the Brand campaign, and this has been the standing design since the current campaigns were created on March 31, 2026 (not a recent recovery measure; no phrase or exact keyword has spent a cent in any month). Broad match can work well in 2026, but only with two guardrails this account does not have: a strong negative-keyword net, and bidding pointed at outcomes that matter. Without them, the account buys subprime auto-lender searches, prepaid debit brands ("deep blue debit card number" cost $131 for one click), competitor banks, and "i need a loan right now" queries, and the bidding algorithm learns from every one of those clicks.

MonthBroadPhraseExact
April$3,349$0$0
May$4,800$0$0
June$8,833$0$0
July$10,217$0$0

Where the wasted money actually went. We classified every search term that spent money in the last 90 days. These are the buckets, with real searches the account paid for:

Waste bucket90-day spendReal searches the account paid for
Subprime & captive auto lenders$1,323"credit acceptance phone number", "westlake financial customer service", "driveway finance"
Competitor banks & credit unions$1,081"give me chase bank", "bb&t bank phone number", "northwest federal credit union"
Servicing other banks' customers$865"spectra credit union customer service", "trust bank customer service", "lakeview customer service number"
Competitor mortgage lenders$821"onity mortgage", "telephone number to quicken loans", "loandepot"
Desperate / unqualifiable intent$787"i need a loan right now", "guaranteed car finance no credit check no deposit", "car dealerships that accept ssi near me"
Prepaid cards & app banks$539"deep blue debit card number" ($131 for one click), "green dot app", "chime com en español"
Subprime installment & payday$417"onemain financial virginia", "title loans near me", "instant $1000 cash advance"
Counted waste$5,836and more sits in Google's hidden low-volume bucket and inside PMax, which shows no search terms at all

None of these people can become members or qualified borrowers. Worse, some of them CALL (mistaking the ad for their own bank's service line), the call counts as a conversion, and the bidding algorithm learns to buy more searches like theirs.

And that is only the half we can see. Google shows search terms for just $16,800 of the $25,400 in search spend; the other $8,600 of search spend produced queries Google keeps hidden (rare, one-off searches, which is exactly the kind broad match attracts and exactly where junk concentrates). Performance Max spent another $8,800 with zero search-term visibility at all. Put together, 51% of the account's $34,000 in spend has no visible search terms. The $6,000 of waste above was counted only inside the visible half; applying the same waste rate to the hidden half suggests the true figure is roughly double, in the range of $11,000 to $12,000 per quarter. The good news: negative keywords block junk searches whether Google reports them or not, so the cleanup in items A1 and A2 protects the hidden half too.

Why it may feel recent: after the June pause, budgets rose and the efficient Performance Max campaigns were paused, so spend through broad search nearly doubled while the reset algorithm bought worse traffic with it. The pain got much louder in June and July; the match-type choice itself dates to March.

The negative-keyword net: a real negative list exists and has been attached since April 1, but the members that would actually block the waste above were only added July 21-22 (confirmed from both the change log and serving data). Even now the attached lists cover only 32% of the identified waste pattern. Meanwhile the best-built negative list in the account (220 competitor and rate-shopping terms) is attached only to an empty test campaign that spends nothing.

The June billing pause reset the bidding algorithm, and it is still recovering

~$8,000 to $11,000 in efficiency lost since restart

The account served zero ads June 9 through 14 after a billing interruption, and the pause reset Smart Bidding's learned state. Because the account's conversion definitions changed several times this year, we measure the effect on a signal whose definition never changed: phone calls from ads. Cost per call had been stable around $25 for ten weeks. After the restart it tripled, and six weeks later it is still roughly 55% above baseline. Going forward this class of problem simply does not happen on our watch: billing alerts and a daily delivery check are part of our standing operating routine, so a quiet interruption cannot run for days.

WindowSpendCost per callCalls per 100 clicks
April baseline$10,024$258.4
Before the pause (May 1 to Jun 8)$13,322$268.8
Dark (Jun 9 to 14)$0
First two weeks after restart (Jun 15 to 30)$8,112$906.6
Late July (Jul 10 to 24)$6,389$407.2

One more signal worth knowing: cost per submitted loan application has deteriorated all year ($79 in April, $109 before the June pause, $355 in late July) and unlike calls it is not recovering. Part of that may be the website tracking decay in item B5 rather than real performance, which is exactly why B5 needs to run: right now nobody can say how many applications the ads actually produce.

Bidding is optimizing for phone calls, not loans

79% of the bidding signal is phone calls; in the loan campaigns it is ~95-100%

Of 1,129 conversions feeding the bidding algorithm over 90 days: 895 are phone calls, 185 are submitted applications, 25 approved, and just 24 funded loans. Worse, the per-campaign goal settings (changed July 2) mean the Personal Loan, Car, and Kasasa campaigns do not count submitted applications at all: the Personal Loan campaign recorded 39 applications in 90 days and zero of them informed its bidding. Brand is technically the only campaign optimizing toward applications, and that is not a point in Brand's favor: brand campaigns should not be on conversion bidding at all (see item A5), which makes fixing the loan campaigns' goals the more urgent. And the wasted clicks are converting: people searching another bank's customer-service line call the tracked number by mistake, that misdial counts as a conversion, and the algorithm learns to buy more of those searches. Redirecting bidding toward applications and funded loans is the single highest-leverage change in this account.

Conversion tracking is 49 actions deep and partly broken

Duplicates across three generations of tracking (Universal Analytics goals, GA4 imports, webpage tags). The "Click on Apply Now" tag fired zero times in 90 days. The submitted-application count is collapsing month over month: 127 in April, 95 in May, 51 in June, 17 so far in July, which needs a root cause. The good news: a genuine offline upload loop exists for Approved and Funded loans, so the foundation for real outcome tracking is partly built. The hardcoded analytics parameters on cofcu.org's apply links threaten the click IDs that loop depends on, and fixing them is a site-side change we will coordinate.

Budget is allocated backwards

Brand search converts at $12.08 and loses 49% of its available impressions to budget caps. Kasasa Checking search converts at $88.93 (with a $10.25 CPC) and keeps spending. Meanwhile the Performance Max campaigns, which were the most efficient tier in the account ($15 to $22 per conversion), have been paused since mid-June, so that budget moved onto more expensive broad search. Cheap demand is being capped to fund expensive junk.

How the account got here, briefly, and how it runs from now on. This account has been through several hands and several eras: long stretches with little active management, a tracking rebuild in January that left funded loans watching from the sidelines, a fresh campaign build in the spring, a billing pause in June, and a series of quick reactive adjustments since. None of that needs relitigating; it is simply the starting point. What changes with us: every material change is proposed, approved by you in writing, then made and logged; budgets move deliberately, not reactively; the bidding algorithm gets stable conditions to learn in; changes post from an agency seat so the account's history reads cleanly (item C4); and you get a weekly written summary, so nothing in this account is ever a mystery again.

What we are assuming, and how we verify it

Every number above is only as good as the tracking underneath it. We would rather name the assumptions now than defend them later. Verifying them is part of the early work, and a couple need people on your side of the table.

AssumptionRisk if wrongHow we verify it
The cost per application figures assume the offline application upload ("Completed") is accurate and complete.The collapsing application trend could be a tracking problem wearing a performance costume, or the reverse.Audit the upload end to end with whoever runs it (Alpharank and/or the credit union's team), coordinated through you. This is question 1 below.
A tracked call (60+ seconds) is a reasonable proxy for a real conversation.Some 60-second calls are wrong numbers or servicing calls, so call counts flatter reality somewhat.Sample where calls actually route and, longer term, connect call outcomes the way loan outcomes are connected.
Funded and Approved counts assume the upload's click matching survives the cofcu.org tracking issue.Funded loans may be undercounted today, making the ads look worse on real outcomes than they truly are.The apply-link fix (item B5 and question 2 below), then compare upload match rates before and after.
Recovery estimates assume freed spend performs near the account's current averages.Actual recovery could land above or below the estimate.Graded against the standardized metrics monthly, in writing, so estimates answer to reality.

Proposed changes, for your approval

Check what you approve. Items tagged routine hygiene are low-risk, reversible cleanup we would normally do without ceremony, listed here anyway so you see everything. Items tagged needs your written approval change spend, strategy, or measurement. Estimated recoveries are conservative.

Act now (first week)

Next (weeks two and three)

Cleanup (ongoing)

Two things we need from you

Both are about setting up the future, reply in the same email if you know either:

1How are Funded and Approved loans uploaded today (Alpharank, MeridianLink AdSync, a manual spreadsheet)? The upload loop is one of the best things this account has, and we want to build on it.
2Who owns changes to cofcu.org? There is a small fix on the apply links that unlocks better measurement of every real outcome we want the ads optimizing toward.
0 of 14 approved  ·  $0/mo est. recovery
The email you send is the written approval. Checking boxes alone approves nothing.