Home Data Adometry Zigs, Visual IQ Zags on Facebook Attribution

Adometry Zigs, Visual IQ Zags on Facebook Attribution

SHARE:

Manu MathewWhen it comes to attribution modeling on the Facebook platform, there’s more than one way to skin a cat.

Last week, Adometry became the first pure play attribution vendor to get certified under Facebook’s ad tracking requirements (AdExchanger story). But not all of its competitors see approval of their ad tags as an important step to integrating Facebook campaign measurement into the media mix.

Take Visual IQ. The pure play attribution vendor has its own ad tags but chooses to use others’ certified ad server tags to track premium Facebook inventory.

It says its non-pixel based approach allows customers to leverage existing data investments and move forward with attribution – without the operational headaches associated with multiplying third party tags. Below, CEO Manu Mathew describes the Visual IQ approach in more detail.

“Visual IQ is not seeking certification as a Facebook ad tracking vendor – as we have been tracking Facebook ads for several years without the need for our clients to place an additional tag on their ads – as is the case with those providers who are currently obtaining certification.

Because of the data-agnostic, pixel-less tracking methodology we utilize at Visual IQ, our clients who are already using existing tools that track Facebook won’t have to spend time creating, placing and trafficking yet another tag from another vendor.  Why reinvent the wheel and double the work? And if someone drops the ball and forgets to tag a single ad with the new tag (which actually happens quite frequently in the media buying world), the entire data set could be compromised.

Visual IQ utilizes 100% of the data from any of our clients’ existing technologies that already track their Facebook advertising efforts. As others spend crucial time and resources navigating the Facebook waters which have been already successfully solved by our clients’ existing technology partners, we continue to solve the problems and challenges that marketers face in understanding how their cross channel media is performing and how best to optimize media budgets using attribution.”

By Zach Rodgers

Must Read

Amazon Ads Is All In On Simplicity

“We just constantly hear how complex it is right now,” Kelly MacLean, Amazon Ads VP of engineering, science and product, tells AdExchanger. “So that’s really where we we’ve anchored a lot on hearing their feedback, [and] figuring out how we can drive even more simplicity.”

Betrayal, business, deal, greeting, competition concept. Lie deception and corporate dishonesty illustration. Businessmen leaders entrepreneurs making agreement holding concealing knives behind backs.

How PubMatic Countered A Big DSP’s Spending Dip In Q3 (And Our Theory On Who It Was)

In July, PubMatic saw a temporary drop in ad spend from a “large” unnamed DSP partner, which contributed to Q3 revenue of $68 million, a 5% YOY decline.

Paramount Skydance Merged Its Business – Now It’s Ready To Merge Its Tech Stack

Paramount Skydance, which officially turns 100 days old this week, released its first post-merger quarterly earnings report on Monday.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters
The Arena Group's Stephanie Mazzamaro (left) chats with ad tech consultant Addy Atienza at AdMonsters' Sell Side Summit Austin.

For Publishers, AI Gives Monetizable Data Insight But Takes Away Traffic

Traffic-starved publishers are hopeful that their long-undervalued audience data will fuel advertising’s automated future – if only they can finally wrest control of the industry narrative away from ad tech middlemen.

Q3: The Trade Desk Delivers On Financials, But Is Its Vision Fact Or Fantasy?

The Trade Desk posted solid Q3 results on Thursday, with $739 million in revenue, up 18% year over year. But the main narrative for TTD this year is less about the numbers and more about optics and competitive dynamics.

Comic: He Sees You When You're Streaming

IP Address Match Rates Are a Joke – And It’s No Laughing Matter

According to a new report, IP-to-email matches are accurate just 16% of the time on average, while IP-to-postal matches are accurate only 13% of the time. (Oof.)