Antifraud is not just an advertiser’s problem
It is advantageous for the partner to notice anomalies himself. If a questionable segment is mixed with good traffic, it degrades the overall statistics, complicates the negotiation of terms and makes it difficult to understand the real economy.
Anomaly does not always mean fraud. Sometimes the cause is technical: an incorrect postback, a lost SubID, a duplicate event, or a timezone error.
Signals that are worth checking
| Signal. | Possible explanations |
|---|---|
| unusually high CTR without further action | Poor placement quality, bot-like traffic, clickbait |
| many events in a short period of time | real splash, double tracker, automation |
| identical device/IP templates | NAT, proxy, technical feature or risk factor |
| GEO doesn't match up with campaign | VPN, incorrect ad settings, attribution |
| raw FTD is available, confirmed FTD is significantly less | KPI, quality, repeat accounts, verification |
| Affiliate and tracker data diverge | timezone, redirect, postback, attribution model |
None of these signs alone proves a violation. Their task is to show where to check.
Separate traffic by SubID
If ten sites go under the same label, the problem placement cannot be quickly turned off. Conversely, the detailed structure allows you to localize the anomaly without stopping the entire source.
Minimum useful level: source → campaign → creative / placement. Additional parameters can be added if they are actually used in the report.
Check the events on the test chain
Before starting a large volume, make a test transition and check how click ID, registration and target action are transmitted. If one system counts an event in UTC and the other in local time, daily reports may differ even with proper integration.
What to do in case of anomaly
- Do not change five settings at once.
- Record the period and the segment.
- Comparison of tracker and partner platform data.
- Check the technical chain.
- Stop a specific suspicious placement if the risk is high.
- Transmit to the SubID manager and the time range for reconciliation.
Quality is more important than trying to “prove traffic is normal”
If the data is really bad, a dispute with the platform won't fix it. It is much more useful to understand the source and rebuild the purchase. And if the problem is technical, detailed markup and test chain will help to show it.
Conclusion
Antifraud should be taken as part of quality analytics. Useful materials: discrepancies between tracker and partner and 12 Traffic Quality Signals.
