We scored 590 AI-generated ad copy assets across 10 landing pages, 5 languages and 3 ad formats against the pages they were written from. 100% fitted their platform's character limit and only 1 asserted a figure absent from the source page. 6.6% were generic — copy that shares almost no vocabulary with the page it promotes.
| Format | Assets | Within limits | Grounded | Unsupported figure |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Google Responsive Search Ads | 260 | 100% | 86.9% | 0% |
| Meta (Facebook & Instagram) Ads | 130 | 100% | 99.2% | 0% |
| Google Responsive Display Ads | 200 | 100% | 98% | 0.5% |
On 2026-07-25 we generated ad copy for 10 landing pages spanning B2B SaaS, e-commerce, local services, non-profit, regulated finance and a deliberately thin page, in Chinese, English, German, Spanish, Vietnamese. Each page was run through 3 ad formats, producing 30 ad sets and 590 individual assets.
Every asset was scored deterministically against its own source page — no human raters and no model judging its own output. "Grounded" means at least a third of an asset's content words appear on the source page. "Unsupported figure" means the asset states a number whose digits appear nowhere on that page; abbreviating a page figure (45 seconds to 45s) does not count. Scores are computed on raw model output, before validation, because that measures the generator rather than the safety net around it.
Scope. This measures one engine on a fixed corpus at prompt revision 2026-07-25.2. It is not a comparison of AI ad tools and the figures are not industry averages. Generation is stochastic, so a repeat run will differ slightly.