AVANTDIGITAL MARKETING
Case study 3 / Geo-targeting strategy

How we make geo-targeting decisions from conversion data

Client: Urban high-rise apartment community in Los Angeles, part of a national portfolio.Scope: Google Ads geo-targeting and campaign structure review.
$1,528spend for 1 conversion in the 25-mile local campaign
0conversions from out-of-market cities
50 miradius of the campaign that produced most conversions

The challenge

A proposal came in to expand the local search campaign to the whole state. The reason was coverage: the state was excluded from a nationwide campaign, and the plan was to fill that gap. There was no conversion data to support the change.

What we did

  • Pulled year-to-date results by campaign and by city.
  • Found that the data did not support a wider map. Most of the account's conversions came from the Performance Max campaign at a 50-mile radius. The 25-mile local campaign spent $1,528 for 1 conversion.
  • Found that out-of-market cities in the nationwide campaign had spend but almost no conversions. This showed what a wider map was likely to produce.

Our recommendation

  • Do not expand a weak campaign to more geography. Find out why the local campaign does not convert first.
  • Expand only to areas where the conversion data shows demand.
  • Get more reach with audience signals, such as rental and relocation intent, not with a wider map.

Why this matters for multifamily

Renters search by city and commute, not by state lines. Wide geo-targeting looks like more reach, but it often buys clicks from people who will not move to your market. We make each targeting decision from your own conversion data.

Conversions are as reported in Google Ads at the time of review (year to date, spring 2026).

Client name withheld. Figures come from client accounts.

Next step

Start with an audit.

We review your account, list what is broken and what it costs you, and give you a fix plan. You decide what happens next.

Request an auditOr email us directly:hello@avantdig.com