PMax asset groups: how to structure them properly.

Performance Max removes ad groups, keywords, and placements, and leaves you exactly one structural tool: the asset group. It is the unit where creative, audience signals, and (for ecommerce) listing groups meet. Because it is the only structure available, getting it right carries more weight than it would in any other campaign type — and yet most accounts we audit treat asset groups as an afterthought, with one catch-all group per campaign or a dozen created ad hoc and never reviewed.

What an asset group actually is

An asset group is a bundle: up to fifteen headlines, five long headlines, four descriptions, images in several ratios, up to five videos, plus audience signals and, if you have a feed, the listing group that defines which products it covers. Google assembles ads from the bundle per surface. One campaign can hold many asset groups, and they all share the campaign budget and target — which is the detail that drives every structural decision that follows.

Theme by message, not by org chart

The core principle: one asset group per coherent message-audience pair. If two customer groups would respond to the same headlines and imagery, they belong in one asset group. If they need different messages, they need different groups. A furniture retailer splitting "sofas" and "dining tables" makes sense — the creative genuinely differs. Splitting "sofas — London" from "sofas — Manchester" with identical creative does nothing but fragment the data each group learns from.

• →Ecommerce default: theme asset groups by product category, with the listing group scoped to match, so creative and products stay coherent.
• →Lead gen default: theme by offer or persona — one group per distinct value proposition, not per landing page variant.
• →Three to five asset groups per campaign is the practical sweet spot in our experience. Beyond that, spend concentrates in one or two groups anyway and the rest starve.
• →If a theme needs its own budget or its own ROAS target, it has outgrown asset groups. That is a campaign split, because budgets and targets live at the campaign level.

The asset quality bar decides your reach

Google scores asset groups on completeness and quality, and the score is not cosmetic. Thin groups — a few headlines, two images, no video — are eligible for fewer formats on fewer surfaces, which means fewer auctions, which means the arbitration layer has less to work with. Fill every slot with genuinely distinct assets, not fifteen rephrasings of one headline. The system tests combinations; give it real variance to test. If you have no video, know that Google will auto-generate one from your images — usually badly. A simple, competent video you control beats an auto-generated one you don't, every time.

Listing groups: the quiet power tool

For ecommerce, the listing group inside each asset group controls which products serve — and by extension, where Shopping spend goes. The default is "all products," and the default is how a campaign quietly spends 40% of budget on your lowest-margin accessories. Segment listing groups to mirror your asset group themes, exclude products you cannot fulfil or do not want to advertise, and review the split when the catalog changes. This is the same discipline as feed optimization, applied one level up.

A structure that scales

The pattern we deploy most often for ecommerce clients: one PMax campaign per margin tier or strategic product line (so budget and ROAS targets can differ), three to five message-themed asset groups within each, listing groups scoped to match, and brand excluded everywhere. It is unglamorous, it survives catalog growth, and every part of it exists because budgets, messages, and products each get exactly one clean home. When performance shifts, you know which layer to look at — which is more than most PMax structures can offer.