Find wasted Amazon PPC spend.

Amazon shows you campaign-level numbers, and campaign-level numbers hide the problem. A campaign at a 32% ACOS looks acceptable. Inside it, forty search terms are converting well and eleven have spent ₹4,000 between them across three months without a single order. The campaign average absorbs them, so nothing looks wrong, and the same eleven terms spend again next month.

The information you need is in the Search Term Report, which arrives as a spreadsheet with tens of thousands of rows and no formatting. Pivoting it properly takes an afternoon, so most sellers do it once, find something alarming, fix that, and never do it again. The reports pile up unread.

Meanwhile the questions that actually decide the account — is this a bidding problem or a conversion problem, are we losing impression share to budget or to bid, is that ACOS bad or is our margin thin — need two or three reports read against each other, which is more work again.

Start where the money is allocated. The campaign reports break spend, attributed sales, ACOS and ROAS down per campaign so you can see the shape of the account rather than its average — which campaigns carry the volume, which carry the waste, and which have been running unchanged since the day they were created.

Sponsored Products, Sponsored Brands and Sponsored Display all publish their own campaign export with different columns and different attribution windows. Each has its own module here, because reading an SB report with SP assumptions is how people conclude their brand campaigns are failing when they are not.

Wasted spend has a precise definition and it is worth being strict about it: clicks you paid for that produced no order, on terms with enough clicks that the absence of orders is a signal rather than bad luck. A term with two clicks and no sale tells you nothing. A term with sixty clicks and no sale is telling you something clearly.

The Search Term module sorts your export by exactly that, so the terms carrying the waste are at the top of the page rather than buried at row 8,000. The PPC Audit runs the same analysis across the whole account and hands back what it found, ranked by what negating it would have saved.

The other half of the same report, and the half people forget. Terms that convert well inside an automatic or broad campaign are candidates to be promoted into their own exact-match targeting, where you can bid on them deliberately instead of paying whatever the loose match decided.

Keyword harvesting finds those candidates and shows the evidence behind each one — clicks, orders, conversion rate, current ACOS — so the decision to promote a term is a judgement you make rather than a recommendation you accept.

N-gram analysis splits every search term into its component words and totals the spend and orders behind each one. It answers a question no single term can: is there a word that appears across dozens of failing terms?

This is where the large, quiet leaks live. A single word negated at the campaign level can stop spend on forty terms at once, and it is usually a word that never appears as a search term on its own — so no amount of scanning the term list would have surfaced it.

ACOS on its own is not a verdict. A 30% ACOS is healthy on a unit with a 39% contribution margin and loses money on one with 25%, so the only honest benchmark is your own break-even — which is the same number as your contribution margin, a fact most sellers have never been told.

TACoS answers the question ACOS cannot: whether advertising is growing the business or has become the business. All four calculators are free, need no account, and run entirely in your browser.

Impression share is the only report that measures what you did not get — the auctions you were eligible for and lost. Read against spend it separates the two reasons a campaign is not scaling: a budget that runs out before the day does, and a bid that was never competitive in the first place. Those need opposite responses, and guessing wrong wastes a month.

Placement data adds the third dimension. Top-of-search converts differently from rest-of-search and product pages, often differently enough that a single bid across all three is leaving money in one and wasting it in another.

Structure problems do not show up as bad numbers in one campaign. They show up as two campaigns bidding on the same term against each other, as budget concentrated in a tier that should be capped, or as a product advertised in four places with no single owner.

The budget audit reads allocation against a seven-tier framework and shows where the money actually sits versus where the framework says it should. The SOP and cheat sheet are the reference material behind those decisions — what to change, in what order, and what to leave alone.

When performance drops, the useful question is which of four things changed: impressions, click-through, conversion, or cost per click. Each has a different cause and a different fix, and each leaves a different fingerprint across the reports.

The troubleshooting module walks that decision tree against your own numbers instead of a generic checklist, and the weekly report tracks the same metrics over time so a slow drift is visible before it becomes a bad month.