Ad relevance diagnostics
Ad relevance diagnostics are three rankings in Meta Ads Manager that compare one ad with the ads competing for the same audience: quality ranking, engagement rate ranking and conversion rate ranking. They replaced the old relevance score. Meta built them to explain why an underperforming ad is underperforming, whether the fix lies in the creative, the landing page or the targeting, not as a target to optimize for.
How does Meta define the three rankings?
From Meta's About ad relevance diagnostics:
| Ranking | Meta's definition |
|---|---|
| Quality ranking | "How your ad's perceived quality compared to ads competing for the same audience." |
| Engagement rate ranking | "How your ad's expected engagement rate compared to ads competing for the same audience." |
| Conversion rate ranking | "How your ad's expected conversion rate compared to ads with the same optimization goal competing for the same audience." |
Quality is measured, in the words of Meta's quality ranking page, "through various signals, such feedback from people viewing or hiding the ad and assessments of low-quality attributes in the ad, such as withholding information, sensationalized language and engagement bait." Each ranking reads Above average, Average, or Below average in three bands (bottom 35%, 20% or 10% of ads), where "average represents the 35th to 55th percentile".
When are the diagnostics available?
Not always. Meta's pages set four limits:
- "ad relevance diagnostics aren't available for ads with fewer than 500 impressions."
- Each ranking "is only available for the last 35 days."
- None of the three is available for dynamic creative.
- Engagement and conversion rate rankings aren't available for the optimization goals "ad recall lift, impressions, reach, custom conversions or value" (engagement rate ranking).
And one that people get wrong: "Ad relevance diagnostics aren't inputs into the ad auction." Relevance itself is. Meta's auction page says estimated action rates and ad quality "measure ad relevance", and that a more relevant ad "could win an auction against ads with higher bids". The rankings are a report on that, after the fact.
How do you read a low ranking?
Meta's How to use ad relevance diagnostics gives a grid of combinations. The pattern underneath it:
| Low ranking | Meta's reading | Meta's fix, shortened |
|---|---|---|
| Quality only | "The ad is perceived as low quality." | Improve the creative's quality; "Avoid low-quality attributes" |
| Engagement only | "This ad isn't spurring interest." | Make it "more engaging, interesting or eye-catching", or change audience |
| Conversion only | "The ad isn't producing conversions." | Improve the call-to-action or post-click experience, or target higher intent |
| Quality and conversion | "This ad is click-baity or controversial." | "more clearly represent the product or service" |
| All three | "There's room for improvement across the board." | Test targeting, creative, optimization goals and post-click |
Meta adds two rules of thumb: "focus on improving low rankings rather than on improving average rankings", and "seek the ideal creative/targeting fit".
What it means for your ads
- Use them only on ads that miss. Meta: "diagnose underperforming ads – not to optimize ads that are already meeting your advertising objectives." It also says "Sometimes high performing ads have below average ad relevance diagnostics rankings and that's OK."
- Read the three together. Meta says reviewing them together "gives you more insights than reviewing each diagnostic individually."
- Expect a low conversion ranking on some products. Meta's example: "High-price or high-consideration products like jewelry should expect lower conversion rate rankings" than t-shirts.
Common mistakes
- Asking for likes. Meta: "Engagement-baiting (for example, asking for likes, comments and so on) will not improve your ad's performance."
- Calling it the relevance score. Meta's page opens with "Ad relevance diagnostics replaced ad relevance score." Advice written for the old single number doesn't map onto three rankings.
Sources
- About ad relevance diagnostics — Meta Business Help Center: the three definitions, the 500-impression minimum, "aren't inputs into the ad auction" and the replaced relevance score (rendered in a browser, accessed 2026-10-16)
- How to use ad relevance diagnostics — Meta Business Help Center: the combination grid, its causes and fixes, and when not to use the diagnostics (rendered in a browser, accessed 2026-10-16)
- About quality ranking — Meta Business Help Center: how quality is measured, the ranking bands and the dynamic creative exclusion (rendered in a browser, accessed 2026-10-16)
- About engagement rate ranking — Meta Business Help Center: expected engagement rate, engagement bait and the excluded optimization goals (rendered in a browser, accessed 2026-10-16)
- About conversion rate ranking — Meta Business Help Center: expected conversion rate and the jewelry example (rendered in a browser, accessed 2026-10-16)
- About ad auctions — Meta Business Help Center: ad relevance as part of total value (rendered in a browser, accessed 2026-10-16)
Meta's help pages are client-rendered and show no date; they were read in a real browser on 16 October 2026. The fixes in the table are shortened; the quoted parts are Meta's words. Meta revises these pages without notice, so check the source before acting on any of it.
Terrads makes new image and video ads that differ in concept and layout, so a low engagement ranking can be answered with a genuinely different ad.