Back in the days, Google had total control over the advertising tech ecosystem. Publishers believed Google as the go-to alternative for displaying ads on their web pages. But, Google’s monopoly was disrupted when header bidding made its way to the industry. Header bidding helped publishers market their advertising impressions to the highest bidder. And advertisers could contact premium inventories and target market in a better way. A win-win situation.
In response, Google launched Exchange Bidding. From the outside, both bidding methods seem the same and try to provide same outcomes (i.e. to sell inventory to highest bidder in real time ). It’s the implementation that makes them distinct. In this post, we will research the differences between header bidding and exchange bidding. And attempt to answer one of the most often asked questions–that is better,header bidding versus exchange bidding?
But before that, let’s do a quick recap for the two.
What’s Header Bidding?
What’s Exchange Bidding?
Exchange Bidding is likewise an RTB auction, but completely managed by Google. Google creates a bid request and pass it to Ad Manager for auction. Then this bid request is categorized based in traffic demographics, ad type, size, and structure. Based upon the category, the bid request is presented to interested bidders, initiating a server-side auction. According to Google, exchange bidding is intended to decrease the complexity of bidding procedure for advertisers and publishers.
Exchange Bidding vs Header Bidding
The two, header bidding and exchange bidding are intended to sell inventory to the highest bidder by making it accessible to multiple need partners. However, the implementation process is extremely different for both. And because of this difference, these procedures are often compared. Here’s the detailed difference between header bidding and trade bidding:
Benefits of Header Bidding over Exchange Bidding
Transparency: Header bidding is often preferred by publishers because they could have total control over the bidding procedure. Additionally, publishers may oversee the bidding process together with access to all of the advertising transactions data. But with EBDA, Google is in-charge, the whole process is hidden from publishers and they need to accept the sum given to them.
Cookie fitting: As header bidding is a client-side auction, cookies can be accessed right to match advertisers. On the other hand, Exchange Bidding can not do that. Yes, user information is exchanged, but the majority of the information is filtered in the procedure making Exchange Bidding less powerful than numerical bidding when it comes to matching advertisers.
Benefits of Exchange Bidding over Header Bidding
Page latency: Among the most discussed drawbacks of header bidding is page latency. That happens because header bidding takes places on the user’s browser. Hence making pages to load slow, though, the lag is of few milliseconds. But in ad business, this difference matters a lot. Sometime exchange price is a server-to-server bidding procedure. Meaning, the bidding occurs from the host without affecting the page loading time.
Technical knowledge: Exchange Bidding saves publishers out of a complicated installation process and manages everything for them. Publishers just need to join with DFP and begin. But, header bidding requires technical knowledge to implement and manage. Though header bidding wrappers make this simpler, but can’t be compared to Exchange Bidding.
Payments: With EBDA, Google handles all of the payments. Payments are sent to publisher accounts straight, which is just one less thing to worry about. But header bidding is handled by publishers. And occasionally, the payment does not match the actual bid, causing revenue loss.
Exchange Bidding and Header Bidding: Can I Run Both?
Yes, you can and you should.
If at all possible, a publisher must benefit from both header bidding and exchange bidding. Run header bidding and swap bidding, collectively, as an experiment. Then track and compare results. The outcomes would be changeable for different publishers, hence, can not be predicted. However, at the conclusion of the experiment, you’d certainly have enough information to say–that bidding process works better for you.
There’s absolutely no known disadvantage of running bidding approaches together. Meaning, you’re pretty much all set for a test.