Every good search marketer is always looking for alternative channels to get better results for clients. Most of us tend to stick to the top two or three options — Google Ads or Meta, or perhaps we’ll add LinkedIn or Microsoft into the mix. These channels are often already overly saturated, and it’s always useful to look at other options. Any alternative to the mainstream is worth testing!
One options you may not have considered is Apple Search Ads. While this platform is still limited in how it can be used (mostly for the promotion of mobile apps) we have found if you’re going after a certain market, you can sometimes achieve better results from Apple Search Ads than anywhere else.
In this article I’ll present a case study of a supermarket focused primarily on branding, who wanted to increase app downloads. I’ll be comparing the results of the same ads running on both Google Ads, and Apple Search Ads.
But first, a short history of Apple Search Ads
Apple Search Ads launched in 2016. Apple Search Ads are sponsored ads which appear on top of search results in the Apple App Store. In 2017, two options became available: Search Ads Advanced, and Search Ads Basic. The main difference between these two options? Basic only lets you run ads at the top of App Store search results with no keywords or audience settings, and you pay per install. Advanced allows you to choose from many different placements, target audiences and keywords, and you pay per tap.
The most important feature of Apple Search Ads is it can access data from the App Store. No other platform can do this.
Current capabilities and features of Apple search ads
The current primary use for Apple Search ads is the promotion of mobile apps in the App Store.
In 2023, Apple published a press release stating “App Store developers generated $1.1 trillion in total billings and sales in the App Store ecosystem in 2022.” Further, they have reported developer billings and sales to be increasing at a rate of about 29% YoY, with an average of more than 650 million weekly worldwide visitors.
Statista recently revealed that in Q1 2024 around 8.4 billion apps were downloaded in the Apple App Store, while there were 25.6 billion apps downloaded on Google Play. While Google has more download volume, Apple is better at revenue generation. In Q2 2024, Google generated around $11.2 billion, while Apple generated $24.6 billion from in-app purchases, subscriptions, and premium apps.
So although Google Play is a great place to advertise apps (and you should definitely be there for visibility and volume, as well as exposure to the Android market), advertising on Apple is likely to achieve a higher ROAS.
Apple Search Ads has four placements to choose from. Most don’t require the inclusion of additional creatives, as it uses the app itself and images available within your app.
- Today Tab: Placed on the front page when users first visit the App Store
- Search Tab: The app pops up when people start searching, on top of the suggested list
- Search Results: The ad appears after people search, on top of the search results
- Product Pages While Browsing: The ad appears inside of app listings, often at the bottom of page or in the “You Might Also Like” section.
Based on the placement you choose, a few different targeting options are available:
- Audience: Apple automatically chooses who to appear for, but you can narrow down specific devices, demographics, location, and customer types (all users, new users, returning users, users of your other apps)
- Keywords: Apple automatically matches ads to searches, but you can add keywords (and negative keywords) manually
The bids are set by choosing Max CPT (cost-per-tap, effectively cost-per-click.) The targeting options are limited, but we have discovered the algorithms understand your app very well. We’ve seen great performance using automated targeting.
While Apple Search Ads feel like they have limited targeting options, they are actually still far more targeted than Google App campaigns. Google App campaigns only allow geo-targeting and some audience signals: no placements or (God forbid!) any keywords at all.
Case Study: Apple Search Ads vs Google App campaigns
One of our clients at Discosloth is a grocery store chain with a popular app they use for promotions and branding campaigns. Let’s look at some actual data from the same app being advertised on both Google and Apple’s app stores, and compare results.
Duration: 40 days
Geo-targeting: a number of small cities across US
Budget: a total of $35,175 across Apple Search and and Google Ads (app install only)
Client: supermarket chain
Goal: app downloads
While we initially wanted to allocate the budget 50/50 between the two platforms, we were unable to spend the entire budget on Apple, so we moved some of the spend across to Google.
| Cost | Avg CPT | Installs | Cost per install | Conv rate | |
| Apple | $7,481.52 | $1.77 | 2,893 | $2.59 | 68.42% |
| $27,692.77 | $0.98 | 7,346 | $3.77 | 8.89% |
Even though we spent far more on Google, with a much lower cost-per-tap, the cost per install ended up being much higher.
Google Play gave us higher visibility and reach, but also made it easy to spend the entirety of the budget. With 3.7x the budget compared to Apple, Google only gave us 2.5x the number of installs. Looking at conversion rate, we can see that Apple’s targeting is incredibly relevant with more than two-thirds of the taps turning into installs. Google shows the ads to a much broader audience, so the conversion rate is lower – only about 1/12 of the taps resulted in installs.
Additionally, a great feature about Apple Search Ads is if you run a Search Results campaign, you can actually see the search terms, while Google hides this information.
Based on this test, we learned that while Apple Search Ads are much more sophisticated in both targeting options and the data shared with you, how much you can spend will be limited. Even with auto-targeting, Apple is still very conservative with how often your ads are shown. If your goal is to maximize downloads, it’s important to consider running both Apple and Google Ads. Limiting yourself to only Apple Search Ads can mean achieving only about a third of the potential downloads.
Therefore, although we don’t think Apple will replace Google any time soon, we do believe it’s the best option if you are prioritizing high quality users over quantity.
What awaits us in the future?
Rumors abound over the future of Apple Ads.
For now at least they’re just rumors. Nothing is certain. We do, however, believe there’s a high chance Apple will evolve beyond serving ads in the App Store only.
The possible placements we see as most likely are Apple TV, sponsored results within Apple Intelligence – Apple’s new LLM/search engine integration – or even Apple Vision Pro if it ever re-emerges. With the growth in AI, and Apple using Intelligence to “summarize” web pages, Safari auto-filling websites you are looking for, there are definitely opportunities. Don’t expect these to evolve tomorrow.
At the moment, Apple work with third parties to sell ads on Apple News and Apple Stocks apps, but this likely indicates that they’re not interested in becoming an ad platform themselves. They are more likely interested in using an existing ad provider. This will not only allow them to use a seamless, proven experience but to also avoid the increasing pressure that comes within highly regulatory environments like the EU.
One thing is for sure: Apple carefully curates its platforms, and for good reason. Google Play is filled with spammy, low-quality content, and Google Ads itself has always been plagued by lower quality advertisers as well. There is almost no possibility that Apple would risk their brand by opening up the platform to just anybody, so they’ll likely keep the advertisers within their ecosystem.
