Pixalate this week released its 2017 Ads.txt Trends Report. The report features data and insights collected by Pixalate detailing the year-end state of ads.txt adoption.
The industry-wide ads.txt effort was born in the IAB's Tech Lab and has created overnight transparency for buyers into the programmatic advertising ecosystem of sellers and domains.
The rise of ads.txt
Since September, Pixalate has been detailing ads.txt adoption on a weekly basis via its blog and has made available for download a list containing all publishers who have an ads.txt file, as observed by Pixalate, which is updated weekly.
The 2017 Ads.txt Trends Report compiles this months-long research into a concise report detailing the rise of ads.txt over the final months of 2017 — and where it stands as the year ends.
Inside the report, you'll find...
Ads.txt adoption trends from September-December 2017
Insight into the Alexa Top 1000 and Top 5000 sites and their ads.txt adoption rates on a week-by-week basis
Insight into the Pixalate Top 1000 and Top 5000 sites — which only contain sites which support programmatic advertising — and their ads.txt adoption rates on a week-by-week basis
Data on which exchanges show up most often on ads.txt files
Includes data on which exchanges are listed most often as a direct partner, as a reseller, and a combination of both
And much more
According to Pixalate's data, on September 18, 2017, the total number of sites with an ads.txt file was 3,523
That number rose to 71,288 by December 18, 2017, representing a rise of 1,924%
Of the top 1000 sites which support programmatic, ads.txt adoption increased from about 16% in September to about 56% in December
Of the 71,288 domains which have an ads.txt file, Google is found on 96.6% of them
Google is the exchange most often listed as a "direct" partner on ads.txt files, while AppNexus is the exchange most often listed as a "reseller" on ads.txt files, according to Pixalate's data
Want more data-driven insights? Sign up for our blog!
Disclaimer: The content of this page reflects Pixalate’s opinions with respect to the factors that Pixalate believes can be useful to the digital media industry. Any proprietary data shared is grounded in Pixalate’s proprietary technology and analytics, which Pixalate is continuously evaluating and updating. Any references to outside sources should not be construed as endorsements. Pixalate’s opinions are just that - opinion, not facts or guarantees.
Per the MRC,
“'Fraud' is not intended to represent fraud as defined in various laws, statutes and ordinances or as conventionally used in U.S. Court or other
legal proceedings, but rather a custom definition strictly for advertising measurement purposes. Also per the MRC,
“‘Invalid Traffic’ is defined generally 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 it is a result of non-human traffic (spiders, bots, etc.), or activity designed to produce fraudulent traffic.”