Since the late 1980s, strategic issues related to the resource-based view and enterprise capabilities have attracted increasing attention in the marketing strategy literature (Day, 1994, 2011, 2014; Gulati, 2010). Previous research consistently suggests that marketing capabilities can enhance firms’ ability to effectively configure and deploy resources, help build a sustainable competitive advantage, and contribute to firms’ revenue and profit growth in the long run (Day, 1994, 2011, 2014; Fang & Zou, 2009; Kotabe, Srinivasan, & Aulakh, 2002; Morgan, Slotegraaf, & Vorhies, 2009; Wang, Klein, & Jiang, 2007; Wiles, Morgan, & Rego, 2012). Consequently, determining which marketing capabilities to develop and how to foster these capabilities has become an increasingly important issue in increasingly competitive marketplaces. To answer the question of which marketing capabilities to build, Day (2011) identified three types of marketing capabilities: (1) static marketing capabilities (static MC), or the capabilities of using internal resources to satisfy market demand; (2) dynamic marketing capabilities (dynamic MC), or the capabilities of adjusting own marketing capabilities to the changing market environment; and (3) adaptive marketing capabilities (adaptive MC), or the capabilities of engaging in vigilant market learning, adaptive market experimentation, and open marketing through relationships forged with partners. Although Day (2011) recognized the importance of each of these capabilities, limited empirical research has established the true performance impact of each, especially with regard to adaptive MC. That is, little is known about the relative contribution of the three types of marketing capabilities to firm performance. Moreover, the boundary conditions under which one type of marketing capability may be more important than another remain unclear. To fill these gaps, this study examines the differential effects of the three marketing capability types on firm performance and explores the role of the market environment in these relationships. To do so, we first develop a valid and reliable measure of adaptive MC. Using it and existing measures, we test the relative impact of different marketing capabilities with data from 225 managers. Our findings suggest that not all marketing capabilities are equally important and that environmental turbulence can partly determine which is more or less influential and thus should receive more attention. This article contributes to marketing research and practice in three ways. First, as a relatively new construct in the marketing capabilities literature, first proposed by Day (2011), adaptive MC is not well understood, and empirical evidence on its impact is limited in the marketing literature. Anecdotally, however, even Fortune 500 companies with well-established decision-making systems have failed to respond to rapid market changes (Hedman & Kalling, 2003), suggesting a need to better understand firms’ ability to adapt and learn. We take an initial step in this direction by examining adaptive MC’s performance impact relative to the other better-known marketing capabilities. The new scale of adaptive MC developed in this research further paves the way for future empirical studies on this construct.