Measurement and Conversion Tracking

The correct approach is to configure the Firebase SDK to pass dynamic revenue values as parameters with each conversion event to capture transaction amounts.

When app conversion tracking shows conversions but displays zero dollar revenue values, this indicates that while the conversion events are being tracked successfully, the actual transaction amounts are not being passed along with those events. To properly track revenue from in-app purchases, the Firebase SDK must be configured to send the actual purchase amount as a dynamic parameter with each conversion event. This allows Google Ads to record not just that a purchase occurred, but also the specific monetary value of that transaction.

The Firebase SDK supports passing dynamic values through event parameters, specifically using the 'value' and 'currency' parameters when logging purchase events. When developers implement this correctly, each time a user completes an in-app purchase, the actual transaction amount flows through to Google Ads reporting, enabling accurate revenue tracking and ROAS (Return on Ad Spend) calculations.

Why the other options are incorrect:

Using enhanced conversion tracking with offline conversion imports is designed for tracking conversions that happen outside of the digital environment or for enriching existing conversion data with first-party customer information. This method doesn't address the core issue of real-time revenue value passing from the app to Google Ads.

Configuring static conversion values in the Google Ads interface would assign the same predetermined value to all conversions of a particular type, which doesn't capture the actual varying amounts of different purchases. This approach fails to provide accurate revenue tracking when purchase amounts differ between transactions.

Enabling auto-tagging and GCLID parameters is important for tracking the source of app installations and attributing users back to specific ad clicks, but it doesn't solve the problem of passing transaction values for in-app purchases. GCLID helps with attribution, not with capturing purchase amounts that occur after installation.

The correct answer is that view-through conversions are exclusively tracked for Display and Video campaign ad impressions, as Search ads require a click interaction to be measured through standard click-through conversion tracking instead.

This is the fundamental nature of how view-through conversions work in Google Ads. A view-through conversion occurs when a user sees (but doesn't click) a Display or Video ad, and then later completes a conversion on the website. This metric exists specifically for Display and Video campaigns because these ad formats can create awareness and influence users without requiring an immediate click.

Search ads, by contrast, are intent-based and only appear when users actively search for relevant keywords. The nature of Search advertising means users must click on the ad to visit the website - there is no 'view' of a Search ad without interaction since Search ads appear in response to queries and require engagement. Therefore, Search campaigns will always show zero view-through conversions, as this metric simply doesn't apply to this campaign type.

Marcus should explain to his client that seeing 45 view-through conversions in Display campaigns and zero in Search campaigns is completely normal and expected behavior - not a tracking issue. The Display campaigns are working as intended by creating awareness that leads to later conversions, while Search campaigns are measured through click-through conversions.

The other answers incorrectly suggest that view-through conversions can be tracked for Search campaigns under certain conditions (minimum impressions, separate reporting sections) or that they apply to all campaign types with lower counts for Search. These are all inaccurate representations of how the view-through conversion metric functions in Google Ads.

The correct answer is to adjust the click conversion window for 'Contract Signed' to 90 days while maintaining the current window for consultation requests.

Here's why this is the best solution:

The core problem is a conversion tracking window mismatch. Rebecca's business data shows 47 signed contracts from Google Ads traffic, but her Google Ads account only reports 18 conversions. The sales director confirms the average time from first ad click to signed contract is 68 days, with a range of 55-85 days. However, the current 30-day click conversion window is only capturing conversions that occur within 30 days of the ad click, missing the majority of contract signings that happen between days 31-85.

By extending the conversion window to 90 days, Rebecca would capture all contracts signed within the 55-85 day timeframe, plus a small buffer. This directly addresses the data discrepancy and would align Google Ads reporting with actual business results. The recommendation to maintain the current window (30 days) for consultation requests is appropriate since those conversions occur within 3-7 days, well within the existing window.

Why the other options are less optimal:

The option suggesting a 60-day window with data-driven attribution would still miss conversions occurring in the 60-85 day range. While attribution modeling is valuable, it doesn't solve the fundamental problem of the conversion window being too short.

Unifying both conversion actions to a 45-day window would be counterproductive. Consultation requests don't need a 45-day window (they occur in 3-7 days), and 45 days still wouldn't capture contracts signed at 55-85 days. The view-through window adjustment is irrelevant to solving the click conversion tracking issue.

The option mentioning position-based attribution with seasonal adjustment factors adds unnecessary complexity. The primary issue is simply that the conversion window is too short to capture the full customer journey. Attribution models and seasonal adjustments won't help if conversions aren't being tracked in the first place due to an insufficient conversion window.