TAG认证渠道广告欺诈率比平均水平低88%.pdf

tag TRUSTWORTHY ACCOUNTABILITY GROUP TAG FRAUD BENCHMARK STUDY NOVEMBER 2019 A report conducted by The 614 Group, commissioned by Trustworthy Accountability Group2| TAG Fraud Benchmark Study: November 2019 88% 1.41% . of impressions in TAG Certied Channels were IVT . reduction of IVT in TAG Certied Channels Executive Summary Trust is essential for the digital advertising ecosystem to function. Advertisers must be able to trust that their ads are seen by real humans in brand-safe environments, and publishers must trust that they will be fully compensated when ads appear on their sites. That type of confidence and trust in digital advertising requires players across the supply chain to work together to ensure traffic quality and brand safety. Digital ad fraud has been a persistent brand safety challenge for the industry. According to eMarketers Digital Ad Fraud 2019 report, the industry suffers losses of $6.5 billion to $19 billion to ad fraud annually. 1Recognizing that individual companies or agencies cannot combat fraud alone, the problem is one that the entire supply chain has tackled with concerted effort. In that vein, the industry came together in 2014 to form the Trustworthy Accountability Group (TAG), a cross- industry self-regulatory program to fight ad fraud and other criminal issues in the digital supply chain. TAGs Certified Against Fraud Program (i.e, TAG Certification) focuses on combating invalid traffic (IVT) across the digital advertising industry and provides companies with a means to communicate publicly their commitment to fighting this type of criminal activity. The digital ad industrys coordinated action through TAG and other initiatives has begun to bear fruit. For instance, The Bot Baseline Reportreleased by ANA and White Ops in May 2019 found that, “fraud attempts amount to 20 to 35 percent of all ad impressions throughout the year, but the fraud that gets through and gets paid for now is now much smaller. ” 2These findings point to the importance of TAG Certified partners: while fraudsters still attempt to defraud advertisers, TAG Certified Channels provide a path to avoid paying for fraud. From January to August, 2019, The 614 Group conducted its third annual quantitative and qualitative research study to measure how considerable an impact TAG Certification has had in reducing fraud in actual campaigns, and to assess how agencies respond when discovering IVT in a campaign. The research focused on discovering whether rates of sophisticated invalid traffic (SIVT) and general invalid traffic (GIVT) were lower in TAG Certified Channels (i.e. channels in which multiple entities involved in the transaction such as the media agency, buy-side platform, sell- side platform and/or publisher had achieved the TAG Certified Against Fraud Seal) in comparison to the industry average. We found that: TAG Certified Channels have an overall IVT rate of just 1.41%, the lowest overall rate to date in three years of measurement, despite a marked increase in the total impression pool for this years study. This represents an 88% reduction of IVT in TAG Certified Channels as compared to the industry fraud average of 11.41%. The TAG Certified Against Fraud Program has grown by more than 26% in the past twelve months alone. At the time of the study, there were 137 companies carrying the TAG Certified Against Fraud Seal. We received over 200 billion impressions as a result of our request a 168% increase over 2018. Because there are so many TAG Certified partners with whom to work, agencies can now meet their goals of finding safe, well- lit and largely fraud-free environments. Marketers can create virtually fraud-free media plans by staying within TAG Certified Channels. 1emarketer/content/digital-ad-fraud-2019 2whiteops/botbaseline2019 A special thanks to Scott Cunningham, founder of Cunningham.Tech Consulting, Advisor to TAG, and Founder of the IAB Tech Lab, for his contributions to the research.3| TAG Fraud Benchmark Study: November 2019 TAG CERTIFIED SELL SIDE PLATFORM TAG CERTIFIED BUY SIDE PLATFORM TAG CERTIFIED AGENCY Study Background and Objectives The digital advertising industry has long acknowledged that the fight against fraud requires a concerted effort, with all market participants working together to ensure traffic quality and brand safety. The industry came together in 2014 to form the Trustworthy Accountability Group (TAG), a cross-industry self-regulatory program to fight ad fraud and other criminal issues in the digital supply chain. TAGs Certified Against Fraud Program (i.e., TAG Certification) focuses on combating fraudulent invalid traffic (IVT) across the digital advertising industry and provides companies with a means to communicate publicly their commitment to combating this type of criminal activity. The digital ad industrys coordinated action through TAG and other initiatives has begun to bear fruit. In 2017, TAG approached The 614 Group for help in measuring the effectiveness of TAG Certification in reducing IVT in actual digital advertising campaigns and establishing a benchmark that could be used to assess continued efficacy over time, noting improvements or declines in the IVT rate. TAG and The 614 Group continue to partner in releasing an annual benchmark of the rate of IVT found in campaigns that flow through T AG Certified Channels as compared to IVT found in non-Certified channels.4| TAG Fraud Benchmark Study: November 2019 Research Methodology This is the third annual TAG Fraud Benchmark Study conducted by The 614 Group, and continues to follow the methodology established in 2017. We analyzed 100% of the impressions of the campaigns to which we were given access to by the agencies whom shared data with The 614 Group analyst team. We also interviewed experts at agencies and others on background. Quantitative Analysis Fraud is a generic term, encompassing a range of nefarious activities. For the purposes of this report, we are specifically concerned with invalid traffic (IVT), which is defined by the Media Ratings Council (MRC) as “traffic that does not meet certain ad serving quality or completeness criteria, or otherwise does not represent legitimate ad traffic that should be included in measurement counts. Among the reasons why ad traffic may be deemed invalid is that it is a result of non-human traffic (spiders, bots, etc.), or activity designed to produce fraudulent traffic. There are two types of invalid traffic: sophisticated invalid traffic (SIVT) and general invalid traffic (GIVT). These are described by the MRC in the following ways: Sophisticated Invalid Traffic (SIVT) includes “traffic identified through advanced analytics, multipoint corroboration, human interventionsuch as hijacked devices, ad tags, or creative; adware; malware; misappropriated content. ” General Invalid Traffic (GIVT) includes “traffic identified through routine and list-based means of filtrationsuch as bots, spiders, other crawlers; non-browser user agent headers; and pre-fetch or browser pre- rendered traffic. ” Data Collection and Processing The 614 Group partnered with six agency holding companies and their MRC-accredited measurement vendors to collect and aggregate all impressions for campaigns that were executed during the period of January 2019 through August 2019. These campaigns included display media and video ads in desktop, mobile web and in-app environments. We did not use sampling of any kind: 100% of all impressions given to The 614 Group were included in the measurement. Upon receipt, all data was aggregated within a secure database in order to create the proper reporting. In calculating fraud rates, we combined both SIVT and GIVT in order to achieve a comprehensive result. SIVT GIVT5| TAG Fraud Benchmark Study: November 2019 Study Parameters Types of Fraud Examined Study Duration Data Examined Volume of Impressions Examined Inventory Type Desktop Display Desktop Video Mobile Web Display Mobile Web Video In-App Display In-App Video SIVT GIVT 200 Billion January - August 2019 100% of data provided by 6 leading media agencies: Dentsu Aegis Network Omnicom Media Group (Annalect) WPP (GroupM) Horizon Media Interpublic Group (Kinesso)Publicis Groupe In conducting the study, The 614 Group relied on measurement of data on inventory characteristics conducted by measurement vendors including DoubleVerify, Integral Ad Science (IAS) and Moat by Oracle Data Cloud (Moat). These three anti-fraud measurement vendors are all TAG Certified Against Fraud and hold accreditations from the Media Rating Council (MRC) that include IVT measurement (for both SIVT and GIVT). In order to determine an industry fraud average, we blended fraud rates from several MRC-accredited measurement vendors. These rates were obtained directly from Moats Fraud Report for H1 2019, the ANA/ White Ops 2019 Bot Baseline Report, and IAS, Media Quality Report for H1 2019. Qualitative Interviews with Industry Leaders The qualitative portion of our research involved extensive interviews with senior level executives at six of the largest agency holding companies and others on background to gain insights on the state of IVT identification, containment, and elimination. Our goal was to get a sense of the requirements, accountability, and best practices in current use. The questions focused on: What is the operational process followed when your team discovered IVT in a campaign? What has changed in your processes in 2019? Has the assignment of responsibility or the perception of brand safety changed in the past year? How does your team use the TAG Fraud Benchmark internally and externally?6| TAG Fraud Benchmark Study: November 2019 We interviewed the following senior-level executives, as well as others on background: Title Name 0.05% Media Agency Adam Gitlin Manny Mark Joe Barone John Montgomery Chandon Jones David Murnick Yale Cohen Eric Warburton President Omnicom Media Group (Annalect) Omnicom Media Group (Annalect) Anny Buakaew U.S. Director of Operations for Annalect Sr. Account Manager, Hearts good to be able to tell clients were in the industry range. ”Agencies find the TAG Fraud Benchmark is helpful in selecting partners as well. For instance, one agency executive noted that it is used “whenever it can be a differentiator between two potential partners.” Another agency envisions a future where the benchmark is the standard for all agency teams to meet, saying, “I can see that since the TAG benchmark is low, this year its 1.41% this could be used as a mandate and then we can tell the agency teams thats the level of fraud they need to meet. ”Some agencies use the TAG Fraud Benchmark globally as a way of establishing goals in each region. “We set a benchmark with a number that weve got for a country or we compare it to the TAG Fraud Benchmark that weve got to measure our progress against whatever IVT. The number may vary from supplier to supplier, but we try and normalize the best way we possibly can and then we use that as a benchmark against which to optimize” .Finally, the benchmark also has PR benefits. “We used the TAG Fraud Benchmark from a PR perspective absolutely in terms of best practice to work with TAG Certified platforms when possible. ” Brand Safety Officers Focused on Internal Organization and Supply Chain Optimization Spell Cleaner, More Trusted Transactions Advertisers and agencies can drive the optimization of their supply chain further by working exclusively or to the greatest degree possible with TAG 2017 2018 2019 Types of Fraud Measured GIVT SIVT/GIVT SIVT/GIVT Number of Impressions Studied 6.5 Billion 75 Billion 200 Billion Number of Participating Agencies 3 5 6 Overall Fraud Rate 1.48% 1.68% 1.41% Measurable Improvement 83% 84% 88% Inventory Types Examined Desktop Display Desktop Video Desktop Display Desktop Video Mobile Web Display Mobile Web Video In-App Display In-App Video Desktop Display Desktop Video Mobile Web Display Mobile Web Video In-App Display In-App Video Over Industry Averages