Value rules are Meta's answer to every advertiser who asked "can I just pay less for that placement" after the old exclusion switch disappeared. And to be fair, it is a decent answer. You can now adjust your bid for specific placements and audiences, telling the system that a conversion from here is worth less to you than a conversion from there.
What value rules are not is an off switch. This distinction matters more than the feature itself, because half the misuse we see comes from people setting a rule as if it were a ban, and then being outraged when the supposedly banned placement keeps appearing in their reports.
TL;DR
Value rules let you raise or lower your bid for defined placements and audiences, with downward adjustments of up to 90%. They work by changing your effective bid in the auction, not by removing inventory, so a placement you discount heavily will show less, not never. Use them where the value difference is real and measurable: placements or audiences whose conversions are genuinely worth less to your business. The arithmetic is simple once you see it worked through, and the honest limit is simpler still: if you never want to appear somewhere, a bid adjustment cannot deliver that, and you need an account-level control instead.
How value rules actually work
A value rule says: when this condition applies, treat my bid as higher or lower by a set percentage. A rule of minus 50% on a placement means your bid in that placement's auctions is halved. A rule of plus 25% on a high-value audience means your bid rises by a quarter when that audience is in play.
Two things follow that people keep missing. First, the adjustment changes your competitiveness, not your eligibility. A halved bid still wins auctions where competition is soft. Second, rules stack with your overall bid strategy, shaping where the system pushes or what the effective cap is in that slice. Either way, the rule is a nudge inside the auction, not a wall around it.
The 90% rule, and why it is not 100%
Downward adjustments go up to 90%. That number invites a misreading: set minus 90% and the placement is basically gone. It is not. A bid cut by 90% is still a bid. In cheap auctions, with weak competition, it still wins. In expensive auctions it loses, which is the point, but "loses most auctions" and "never appears" are different outcomes, and your reports will show the difference.
Meta stops at 90% for a reason worth respecting. A true zero would be an exclusion by another name, and Meta has spent the last two years removing exclusions from performance campaigns. The 90% cap is the compromise: you can express a strong preference, but you cannot quietly rebuild the old veto system out of bid rules.
A worked example
Keep the numbers round, because the logic is what matters. Suppose your normal bid for a purchase is 20 euros, and you know from your own data that purchases from Audience Network placements are worth less to you: they convert, but they refund more and repeat less, so you value them at half.
- Normal placement bid: 20 euros
- Value rule for that placement: minus 50%
- Effective bid in that placement: 10 euros
Now suppose a second placement converts well but the customers are one-time bargain hunters you value at only a tenth of your core buyer. A minus 90% rule gives:
- Normal bid: 20 euros
- Value rule: minus 90%
- Effective bid: 2 euros
At 2 euros you will win very few auctions in competitive inventory, and you will still win some in quiet corners. That is the honest shape of the tool. If those quiet-corner wins bother you, value rules are the wrong tool for that placement, and you should say so plainly instead of stacking rules and hoping.
A positive example for balance: if purchasers from a high-intent audience are worth double to you, a positive rule doubles your effective bid for them. You pay more to win the auctions that matter most. Same tool, opposite direction, and usually the smarter use of it.
Where value rules earn their keep
Use them when the value gap is real, measured, and stable:
- Placements with genuinely lower customer value. Not placements you dislike, but placements whose customers refund more, repeat less, or cost more to serve, proven in your own data over a meaningful sample.
- Audiences with different worth. Existing customers versus cold prospects, high-intent engagers versus broad interest audiences. If one group is worth half the other, bid like it.
- Geographic or device slices with real margin differences. If one region's fulfilment costs eat your margin, a bid adjustment reflects that honestly.
Do not use them when the gap is a hunch from one bad week, when the sample is under a few hundred conversions, or when what you actually want is exclusion. A rule built on noise will quietly distort your delivery for months, because nobody revisits bid rules the way they revisit creative.
Setting rules without shooting yourself in the foot
A short discipline for rules that stay sane:
- One rule per clear value gap, named so a stranger can tell what it does
- Built on at least a few hundred conversions of evidence, not a feeling
- Reviewed monthly, because value gaps drift as your product and market change
- Never stacked three deep on the same slice, where the combined effect becomes guesswork
- Paired with placement reporting, so you can see what the rule actually did to delivery
And a warning about stacking: two minus 50% rules on overlapping conditions do not always combine the way you expect, and the resulting effective bid can end up far lower than you intended. Keep rules few, distinct, and documented.
The honest limit, stated once more
Value rules are a pricing tool, not a placement policy. They answer "what is this worth to me" with admirable precision. They do not answer "never show here", and pretending otherwise leads to the exact frustration that fills agency inboxes: "we set it to minus 90% and it still shows". Yes. That is what minus 90% means. It means almost never, in expensive auctions, and sometimes, in cheap ones. If almost never is not good enough, you need a different control, and you should ask for that control by name instead of torturing a bid rule into a ban it was never built to be.
Used honestly, value rules are one of the better tools Meta has shipped in a while. They let you pay in line with value, which is the whole game. Used as a disguised exclusion, they disappoint everyone, including the person who set them.
FAQ
What are Meta value rules?
Value rules let you adjust your bid for specific placements, audiences, and other defined conditions, so the system bids more where conversions are worth more to you and less where they are worth less.
How far down can a value rule adjust my bid?
Downward adjustments go up to 90%. That is a steep discount, but it is not zero, so the placement or audience can still win auctions where competition is weak.
Can value rules fully exclude a placement?
No. A bid adjustment changes competitiveness, not eligibility. If you need a placement fully excluded, value rules cannot do that, and you need an account-level control instead.
Should I set a minus 90% rule on a placement I dislike?
Only if the placement's conversions are genuinely worth very little to you, proven in your own data. Dislike is not a value gap. A rule built on dislike will distort delivery without improving results.
Do value rules work with cost caps and highest volume bidding?
Yes, but they shape the bid differently in each case. With highest volume they steer where the system pushes hardest. With a cost cap they shape the effective cap in that slice. Either way, they nudge inside the auction rather than overriding your strategy.
How often should I review value rules?
Monthly, at minimum. Value gaps change as products, prices, and markets move, and a rule nobody revisits turns from a smart adjustment into stale distortion.
MetaMaxd is a Meta ads agency. We set bid rules that match what a conversion is actually worth, and we do not dress up a discount as a ban.
