Curated deals were once seen as a smart way to bring structure to programmatic chaos. Today, they’ve become table stakes.
Everyone talks about added value, yet few define what that value is or how to measure it. Without clear standards or accountability, the concept becomes vague. But why does it continue? Because talking about perceived value is easy, even if working to unlock that value isn’t easy at all.
Curation has become a catch-all label. IAB Tech Lab CEO Anthony Katsur even equated it to an “ad network” at one point. What once lacked clarity due to its novelty now lacks clarity by design.
For many, curated buying has become a gamble: Sometimes it pays off; sometimes it doesn’t. However, instead of being a game of chance, curation must be a balanced and well-considered deal that benefits all parties.
The problem with curation
The concept of curation is great. It involves understanding which deals include purpose-driven improvements and where labels that sound impressive serve as little more than justification for higher prices.
In practice, it must mean more than simply putting filters in place.
According to programmatic consultancy Jounce Media, only 18.6% of deals on the market are now considered open auctions. Almost three-quarters of all bids are currently classified as curated deals, despite publishers’ profits often remaining the same. The average effective margin for curated deals (30%) and the average effective CPM ($0.51) are nearly identical to those of traditional DSP targeting fees.
The “curation” label has replaced a meaningful approach. Curation works when there is efficiency and transparency – only clear content, context and audience can make trading results predictably efficient.
It’s also essential for all parties to understand the financial side of the process and have access to campaign metrics, providing tangible control over trading. But that’s not what the majority of “curated” packages offer today.
ESG, DEI and ‘premium audience’ narratives
If done right, curation is about matching highly detailed purposes with precise requests, not just segmenting inventory without adding value. It requires a clear and consistent logic for selecting specific traffic, enriching it and understanding what makes it more effective than baseline inventory. We have access to the actual post-bid data on our partners’ platforms, so it immediately becomes apparent whether there is a tangible impact.
Too often, when researching trading data with the team, we see the same inventory passed through shallow filters and relabeled with language that sounds premium but doesn’t deliver premium performance. A new name, a recycled bundle, a few added constraints, and suddenly the CPM doubles.
But despite all the regalia of custom, eco-conscious, ethical and inclusive filters, the campaign metrics stay the same.
That’s the key. If a curated buy delivers the same results as a standard open market impression, then it’s a standard open market impression – just in a more expensive package.
Progress toward meaningful curation
The shift toward meaningful curation is part of a broader industry recovery. As third-party cookies phase out and identity signals fragment, buyers are no longer willing to rely on assumptions. They demand transparency, traceability and performance.
According to recent IAB Europe data, 31% of advertisers prioritize brand safety and media quality as key factors in their investment decisions. Initiatives like the Curation Framework underscore the shift toward controlling first-party data and establishing interoperable standards. At the same time, market analysis already reveals a growing tension in curated marketplaces.
What is needed now is alignment between buyers who expect results, publishers who can deliver signal-rich supply and platforms that enable curated deals with clarity.
Progress for publishers lies in actively communicating with dedicated SSPs about their audience and placements. They are responsible for supplying detailed segmentation and specifically organized first-party data to monetization platforms, demanding transparency on the mechanics of curated deals and clear audience criteria. This will help avoid excessive dependence and preserve the value of their direct relationships with buyers.
Platform owners need to understand that curation involves changing from standard behavior to advanced thinking. SSPs shouldn’t just use the word “curation” to gloss over unclear mechanics, but proactively and openly communicate with publishers and DSPs to match successful combos. And DSPs shouldn’t just look at the results; they need to track the numbers and provide detailed real-time feedback.
Progress for advertisers means rigorously determining campaign criteria in exchange for higher conversion rates. Advertisers will put in less effort compared to publishers while remaining equally important in curated trading.
True curation fundamentals
The universal principles of meaningful curation are still being developed by the Tech Lab’s Curation Framework Working Group, evolving through constant debates. We believe curation encompasses three key elements: transparency, signal enrichment and measurable outcomes. All participants require shared access to the deal’s structure, its inventory and the performance evaluation criteria. It’s not a generic filter but real data: content quality, contextual fit and audience behavior. That’s what makes impressions perform. Lastly, everyone involved – buyers, sellers and platforms – must be able to track the results and understand what works and why.
When executed correctly, curated deals enhance outcomes and improve the user experience. Its logic is sound, transparent, trackable and fair for those willing to invest in doing it right.
Test deals across selected partner platforms have shown that when curated paths are properly architected, the results speak for themselves: more precise targeting, stronger conversions and higher yields. Advertisers win with improved efficiency, but the economic advantage shifts to the supply side, because that’s where the enrichment happens.
The truth is that the moment has now arrived for the industry to course-correct. If we continue to call everything “curation,” we risk rendering the term meaningless. Worse, we risk devaluing something that can be powerful if built with purpose.
Industry players need to stop rewarding superficial labels and start demanding clarity. If we want the traffic curation model to survive, it’s time for each market participant to demand complete transparency from their partners, challenge vague “premium” labels and prioritize clear, verifiable outcomes above all. The industry must collectively refuse to let the illusion of added value replace a genuine one.
This responsibility doesn’t fall on one player alone. It’s up to all of us – publishers, buyers, platforms and providers – to determine what this market will look like in two or three years. Choosing transparency and prioritizing quality, we build toward a curation model that the industry deserves, because real change demands a shared commitment.
