What are advertising discrepancies?

Advertising discrepancies occur when there are differences between a publisher’s first-party ad server data and the third-party ad server data used for billing. For example, a publisher may track delivery in Google Ad Manager, while an advertiser bills based on figures from platforms such as Google Campaign Manager, Innovid, or Extreme Reach. These differences in reported impressions, clicks, or video metrics must be reconciled to ensure accurate billing and revenue recognition.

Why do discrepancies happen between ad servers?

Discrepancies occur because different ad servers use distinct counting methodologies, tracking technologies, and filtering rules. For example, impressions recorded in Google Ad Manager may not match those reported by platforms like Google Campaign Manager, Innovid, or Extreme Reach due to differences in how and when delivery is measured, as well as time zones and data processing delays.

How do publishers reconcile ad delivery data?

Publishers reconcile ad delivery data through discrepancy reporting by comparing first-party ad server delivery with third-party reporting to identify discrepancies, investigate root causes, and align on billable numbers before invoicing. This process ensures accurate billing, reduces disputes, and protects revenue.

What is discrepancy reporting software?

Discrepancy reporting software automates the process of identifying, analyzing, and resolving differences between first-party and third-party ad server data. It provides unified visibility across systems, highlights discrepancies, and enables teams to investigate root causes and align on billable numbers faster and more accurately, with automated alerts surfacing issues as they occur.

How does discrepancy reporting help prevent revenue loss?

Discrepancy reporting helps prevent revenue loss by identifying under-delivery, misaligned reporting, and billing discrepancies before invoicing. By resolving differences between first-party and third-party ad server data early, publishers can avoid under-billing, reduce make-goods, and protect revenue.

How does direct reporting differ from forecasting and client-facing reporting?

Direct reporting focuses on tracking and reconciling actual campaign delivery against third-party ad server data to ensure accurate billing. Forecasting is used to predict future delivery and inventory availability before campaigns run. Client-facing reporting is the final step, where reconciled and validated data is delivered to advertisers. Together, these processes form a complete workflow: forecasting predicts delivery, direct reporting validates actual performance, and client-facing reporting communicates results to advertisers.

Direct Reporting

Seamlessly connect to 200+ advertising and media data sources

Diagram showing data sources feeding into Burt analytics platform, including Celtra, AdBook, Google Ad Manager, IAS, Flashtalking, Salesforce, and others. Burt outputs include studio, data management, reports, Looker, Google BigQuery, Tableau, Power BI, AWS, and S3.

Screenshot of a data dashboard for campaign performance, showing metrics like impressions, clicks, and various graphs and charts.

Get numbers accurate enough to bill on, and automatically eliminate discrepancies by reconciling third-party delivery data and pushing it into your OMS.

With Burt, you can identify campaigns not meeting their delivery goals, find the root cause, and resolve problems faster.

That means more revenue, less time in Excel, and fewer make-goods.

Request Demo

Reach out today to hear about Burt’s Direct Reporting solution.

Frequently Asked Questions

Advertising discrepancies occur when there are differences between a publisher’s first-party ad server delivery data and the third-party ad server data used for billing. For example, a publisher may track delivery in Google Ad Manager, while an advertiser bills based on figures from platforms such as Google Campaign Manager (GCM), Innovid, or Extreme Reach. These differences in reported impressions, clicks, or video metrics must be reconciled to ensure accurate billing and revenue recognition.
Discrepancies occur because different ad servers use distinct counting methodologies, tracking technologies, and filtering rules. For example, impressions recorded in Google Ad Manager may not match those reported by platforms like Google Campaign Manager, Innovid, or Extreme Reach due to differences in how and when delivery is measured, as well as time zones and data processing delays.
Publishers reconcile ad delivery data through discrepancy reporting by comparing first-party ad server delivery with third-party reporting to identify discrepancies, investigate root causes, and align on billable numbers before invoicing. This process ensures accurate billing, reduces disputes, and protects revenue.
Discrepancy reporting software automates the process of identifying, analyzing, and resolving differences between first-party and third-party ad server data. It provides unified visibility across systems, highlights discrepancies, and enables teams to investigate root causes and align on billable numbers faster and more accurately, with automated alerts surfacing issues as they occur.
Discrepancy reporting helps prevent revenue loss by identifying under-delivery, misaligned reporting, and billing discrepancies before invoicing. By resolving differences between first-party and third-party ad server data early, publishers can avoid under-billing, reduce make-goods, and protect revenue.
Direct Reporting focuses on tracking and reconciling actual campaign delivery against third-party ad server data to ensure accurate billing. Forecasting, on the other hand, is used to predict future delivery and inventory availability before campaigns run. Client-facing reporting is the final step, where reconciled and validated data is delivered to advertisers.
Together, these processes form a complete workflow: forecasting predicts delivery, direct reporting validates actual performance, and client-facing reporting communicates results to advertisers.