The Decartes Square: A Decision-Making Tool in Traffic Arbitrage

Traffic arbitrage teams regularly face complex strategic decisions. Choices like entering a new GEO or exploring a new traffic source can either drive explosive growth or result in serious losses. To assess all potential outcomes and avoid impulsive moves, webmasters can use a decision-making tool known as the Decartes Square. This method helps analyze a situation from four distinct perspectives and account for less obvious factors before committing to action. While similar to a classic pros-and-cons list, the Decartes Square goes further—it pushes you to evaluate not only the benefits and risks of acting, but also those of not acting. The goal is to reveal hidden consequences, weigh risks and benefits clearly, and support better-informed choices.

What Is the Decartes Square?

The Decartes Square is a simple yet powerful framework for structured decision-making, introduced by philosopher René Descartes. It involves answering four key questions about any potential action:

• What will happen if I do this?

  What benefits or gains can I expect from taking this step?

• What will happen if I don’t do this?

  What positive aspects of the current situation will be preserved if I choose not to act?

• What won’t happen if I do this?

  What opportunities or positive outcomes might I lose by taking action?

• What won’t happen if I don’t do this?

  What benefits might I miss out on by not making this move?

To apply the method, divide a piece of paper into four quadrants and write one question in each. Then, carefully and thoroughly list your answers. This visual layout helps compare the pros and cons of both action and inaction, creating a clearer picture of the decision landscape.

Honest and specific answers are key. Take your time and try to list as many relevant points as possible for each quadrant. Even if the Decartes Square doesn’t provide a definitive answer, it externalizes the thinking process and encourages rational analysis. Below, we’ll explore how this method can be applied directly in the context of traffic arbitrage with examples.

Why Webmasters Should Use the Decartes Square

In the world of traffic arbitrage, decisions are often made under conditions of uncertainty. New platforms or GEOs may promise high ROI but also carry unforeseen risks. A basic pros-and-cons list doesn’t always give the full picture—we may overestimate the potential upside or underestimate the cost of failure. The Decartes Square helps webmasters avoid this kind of one-sided thinking by systematically analyzing both positive and negative outcomes of both action and inaction.

This approach has become especially relevant after recent disruptions in the traffic market. For example, in late 2024, stricter Google Ads policies led to mass account bans and significantly tougher moderation. Many arbitrage specialists described the situation as “a real nightmare”: familiar PPC schemes stopped working, bans became routine, and consistent profits grew harder to achieve. The PPC crash illustrated how even reliable traffic sources can quickly become unstable. In such an environment, teams face difficult choices—should they explore new traffic channels for diversification or double down on more stable, known options? The Decartes method helps bring clarity to such strategic dilemmas.

By using the Decartes Square, webmasters can weigh not just the potential gains of a new direction, but also the value of preserving current results—and the costs associated with each option. This approach reduces the chances of impulsive decisions driven by hype or FOMO. Instead, you end up with a structured list of arguments for each scenario and can make a fact-based, logical decision that balances risk and reward.

Below, we present two practical examples of applying the Decartes Square to common scenarios in traffic arbitrage: launching campaigns in a new GEO and adopting a new advertising platform. These examples show how writing out answers to all four questions leads to clearer insights.

Example 1: Deciding Whether to Launch in a New GEO

Scenario: The team is considering expanding into a new geographic market with specific offers. We’ll use the Decartes Square to evaluate whether this expansion is the right move.

What will happen if we launch in a new GEO? (positive consequences of action)

• We’ll attract new audiences and increase traffic volume, potentially boosting conversions and profit.

• The business will expand to an international level and capture market share before competitors.

• We’ll diversify risk and revenue streams, reducing dependency on performance in current regions.

• The team will gain experience in a new country (local marketing, new funnel approaches), increasing internal expertise.

• Brand or product awareness will grow in the new region, strengthening our overall market position.

What will happen if we don’t launch in a new GEO? (positive consequences of inaction)

• We’ll save budget and resources by avoiding localization, new creatives, and testing in an unfamiliar market.

• We avoid the risk of failure—no losses from an underperforming campaign in a new region.

• We can focus efforts on optimizing current GEOs, possibly achieving better results without spreading resources thin.

• The team won’t be overloaded with extra tasks, reducing stress and maintaining current workflows.

• Predictability will remain high—working in known markets helps us better forecast outcomes and avoid surprises.

What won’t happen if we launch in a new GEO? (negative consequences of action)

• We’ll incur additional expenses: translation, local landing pages, legal adjustments, etc.

• Focus on current regions may be reduced, possibly slowing progress in well-performing markets.

• Immediate profitability may not happen—initial investments in testing and scaling could lower short-term ROI.

• Operational complexity will increase: we might need local traffic experts or reallocate team time for the new market.

• There’s no guarantee of success—high uncertainty remains, and the new market may not perform as expected.

What won’t happen if we don’t launch in a new GEO? (negative consequences of inaction)

• We won’t gain the extra revenue and growth that the new market could have offered—missed opportunity.

• Audience reach won’t expand—competitors may capture the market instead.

• Lack of diversification will keep us vulnerable: if current GEOs underperform, there’s no backup source of revenue.

• The team will miss out on new learning and growth that come from exploring new markets.

• If the GEO is relatively untapped, we miss the opportunity to be early movers—entering later will likely be harder due to stronger competition.

After analyzing all responses, the team can weigh the cumulative pros and cons. If the benefits of launching in the new GEO clearly outweigh the risks, expansion is likely justified. If the downsides dominate—or the pros of inaction are too strong—it might be worth postponing or reevaluating. The Decartes method doesn’t provide a final answer, but it highlights the strengths and weaknesses of each argument, helping the team make a structured, informed decision rather than relying on assumptions or gut feeling.

Example 2: Deciding Whether to Test a New Traffic Source

Scenario: A webmaster is considering launching ad campaigns on a new traffic source (e.g., starting with Google Ads or another platform they haven’t used before). We’ll assess this move using the Decartes Square method—especially given that new channels often come with instability, as seen recently with Google PPC.

What will happen if we test a new traffic source? (positive consequences of action)

• We’ll gain an additional stream of leads and conversions, increasing overall traffic volume.

• With successful optimization, overall profit may rise—high-intent traffic (e.g., from paid search) can yield strong ROI.

• We’ll diversify marketing efforts; if the primary channel underperforms, the new one can help mitigate losses.

• We’ll reach audiences not available in current channels (e.g., users absent from FB but active in search).

• If we master a new platform ahead of competitors, it gives us a tactical advantage.

What will happen if we don’t adopt a new traffic source? (positive consequences of inaction)

• We save time and budget by not investing in a new platform or team training.

• We avoid the risk of bans, disapprovals, and policy violations on unfamiliar platforms.

• We can focus entirely on optimizing current traffic sources, extracting maximum results.

• No need to train the team or hire specialists for a new system.

• Fewer operational complications—fewer dashboards, easier analytics, and lower error risk.

What won’t happen if we launch a new traffic source? (negative consequences of action)

• We won’t avoid training costs: learning the new platform will require time and money.

• Initial campaigns are unlikely to be stable—expect moderation hurdles, bans, or budget waste while finding winning creatives.

• Immediate profitability may drop—test budgets could yield losses until optimization is achieved.

• Attention to core traffic sources may decline—team focus will be split, reducing efficiency.

• Additional operational tasks arise: more ad accounts, more metrics, and faster response needed in a new environment.

What won’t happen if we don’t adopt a new traffic source? (negative consequences of inaction)

• Traffic and sales volume won’t grow beyond the current level—scaling potential goes untapped.

• We stay dependent on just one or two channels. If they underperform (due to bans, ad fatigue, or rising costs), the business suffers.

• Competitors working in this channel will continue to grow there—we risk losing share and audience.

• The team won’t acquire new skills or expertise. We might miss trends or niches gaining momentum.

By working through the scenario using the Decartes Square, we see a clearer picture of actual risks and opportunities. For example, if Google Ads promises strong ROI but also shows a high number of potential blockers (bans, costs, resource strain), it may be better to delay or thoroughly prepare first. Conversely, if sticking to the status quo looks riskier in the long run, it’s a clear call to explore new territory. Ultimately, this method brings discipline to decision-making: either you build a solid case for experimentation, or you justify waiting—based not on gut feeling, but structured reasoning.

The Decartes Square method helps webmasters and arbitrage teams make more balanced, well-reasoned decisions. By breaking down a dilemma into four simple questions, you can lay out all the pros and cons and assess the situation from multiple angles.

This approach is especially valuable in the fast-paced world of traffic arbitrage, where every move comes with both opportunity and risk. Using the Decartes Square before launching a new GEO, testing a new traffic source, or making any other significant change allows you to pause for analysis and reduce the likelihood of costly mistakes.

In the end, even if the decision remains difficult, you’ll know it was made deliberately—based on a full assessment of possible outcomes, not on gut instinct or impulse. That’s the foundation of long-term success in arbitrage: making decisions with a clear head and full awareness of the consequences.