Article

Resolving click discrepancies

Discover the most-read articles

You compare your clicks in Affilae, Google Analytics, Instagram or Facebook Ads and the figures do not match. This is expected: every tool counts clicks in its own way, at a different moment of the user journey.

This page lists the most common causes of discrepancy, in the order you should check them, then covers the case of URL shorteners such as Bit.ly.

Good to know: gaps from 10 to 20% between two tools are considered normal. Beyond that, there is a cause to identify, and our teams remain available to run the analysis with you.

Why two tools never count the same number of clicks

As all marketing tools are different, there are several causes that can impact click tracking. This short guide will enable you to understand the first causes and give you the key information to go further.

Our teams also remain available to go further in the analysis with you and find marketing and technological solutions to reduce these performance gaps.

Common causes of discrepancies

Your campaign configuration

The configuration of marketing campaigns can take into account several parameters that can limit the number of clicks counted for your partners. Start by comparing how click and campaign tracking is configured across the different tools you use.

Session duration

On Affilae, like other tools, you can configure a duration between two identical clicks from the same user (same IP) so that not all the clicks from a user on the same link are counted, but only the clicks that are considered unique: this is the session duration.

This makes it possible to obtain a conversion rate that is adjusted to the reality of Internet users’ browsing. The number of unique clicks will therefore always be lower than the number of gross clicks.

For example, in Google Analytics it is set to 30 minutes by default, is that also the case for your Affilae program? The setting lives in your program configuration, in the Session duration field.

Geotargeting of campaigns

In certain cases you can activate the tracking of clicks for a specific country or geographical area, this is the geotargeting of campaigns.

If you decide, for example, to limit click tracking to France, then only clicks collected on French IPs will be tracked and counted by Affilae. Clicks tracked outside of this area will be ignored by Affilae and blacklisted, and will not result in conversions. The setting lives in your program configuration, in the Geotargeting field.

Anti-fraud protections

Affilae automatically includes anti-fraud protections for clicks, allowing us to protect you thoroughly against malicious actors or clicks from robots that are not relevant to the analysis of your partner’s performance.

Here is an article on affiliate fraud that will allow you to better understand our action and how we try to prevent it. These parameters can be activated and deactivated at any time through our tracking scripts: see the integrations documentation for your reference.

Measures to protect the personal data of Internet users

We live in a data-driven world and for several years, we have observed the development of various measures to protect personal data when Internet users browse.

These measures come both from attempts to regulate Internet users themselves, such as the growth of adblockers or VPNs, and from legal regulations such as the GDPR, cookie walls, or even more recently the initiatives of the United Kingdom with the ICO (Information Commissioner’s Office) and European developments to come with the e-Privacy regulation.

For example, if you have implemented a non-permissive cookie wall and your customer refuses to give consent to the collection of their data, then you will not be able to track clicks and conversions, depending on the tracking method implemented.

The tracking method used

We offer several tracking methods including classic JavaScript tracking scripts, redirection, APIs and Server-to-Server.

Unfortunately, these methods are not all equally reliable. For example, tracking scripts in JavaScript are a simpler and quicker technology to implement on a website, but are subject to numerous hazards that can impact their triggering: adblockers, cookie banners (ICO and user consent), poor technical implementation, deduplication and attribution.

On the other hand, Server-to-Server or the implementation of an API allows for the automation of clicks and conversions and are considered to be much more reliable methods. Indeed, since it is the brand, the advertiser, that brings the data collected back to the source, the accuracy is supposed to be more absolute.

Where to check these settings in your program

In the sidebar, open Manage programs, then click your program name.
Click Configuration.
Stay on the Settings tab to find the Session duration and Geotargeting fields.
Open the Tracking tab to find the integration method installed on your site.

MANAGE MY PROGRAMS

My program

Configuration

My affiliates

Medias

Clicks

Conversions

Payments

The Configuration menu inside the program menu, on the advertiser side.

The Bit.ly case (or similar URL shortener)

Affilae offers different types of tracking URLs: direct links (mywebsite.com/#ae1) and redirects (https://affilae.com/xxxxxxx).

To illustrate this difference, we will take the example of bit.ly, which uses redirection links, against the use of direct links on Affilae. The difference is essentially in the moment when the click is counted, but that is not the only difference.

Reason 1: clicks on one side, sessions on the other

The way Bit.ly works is that it encapsulates your initial link and redirects to your site. The click is then counted when the user clicks on the link.

The problem is that you do not know if the customer really arrived on the site, if they really loaded the page or if they left before the page loaded.

Conversely, with Affilae, you use direct links without redirects. From A to B, with no third party tracking or advertising between you and your partner. In other words, Affilae counts sessions and Bit.ly counts clicks.

Bit.ly counts clicks. If a user clicks several times on a link, or if the clicks come from the same bot, each click is counted.
Affilae measures sessions. Multiple page views from the same user are tracked as one session.
When comparing data between Bit.ly and Affilae, comparing clicks to sessions is like comparing apples to oranges.

Reason 2: bot traffic

Bit.ly counts clicks from bots, unless they are known bots or if there is a high rate of click activity from an IP address, in which case they only consider this bot traffic for a certain period of time (see Bit.ly support).

With Affilae it is not the same. As the click is counted when the page is loaded and not when the link is clicked, we have embedded different anti-click fraud technologies and in particular the detection of a human mouse movement on the page.

Reason 3: unintentional clicks

Let us take the example of Instagram, of links posted in stories. They generate a lot of traffic due to browsing habits that differ from the desktop, and the slightest click, even unintentional, can trigger tracking and the link to the advertiser’s page, even if the user immediately goes back without having loaded the page.

This happens every day. These are unintentional clicks, but they are still counted with Bit.ly.

Why Affilae counts differently

With Affilae, or even Google Analytics, we count the clicks when the customer arrives on the page to which you send the user (the landing page): the script is loaded when the user actually displays the page.

This is much more secure in terms of tracking because we are sure that the user has seen the page. This is in line with the recommendations of the IAB (Internet Advertising Bureau) for the last 5 years, in order to fight against click fraud in particular, but also to obtain data that is as close as possible to the behaviour of Internet users.

Best practices

Tip: always compare two metrics of the same nature. Put Affilae sessions against Google Analytics sessions, never Affilae sessions against the clicks of a URL shortener.

Check your own settings first, Session duration and Geotargeting, before concluding that tracking is broken.
Note the exact period compared and the time zone of each tool: a one-day offset is enough to create an apparent gap.
If measurement accuracy is critical for you, favour Server-to-Server or the API over JavaScript scripts.
These elements are possible answers. In any case, you must check these hypotheses and scenarios yourself in order to choose the tracking method that makes the least difference between your different tools.

Frequently asked
questions

Voir plus de questions reponses

Gaps from 10 to 20% are considered normal. Below that threshold, there is no tracking problem to look for. Above it, work through the causes listed on this page, then contact our teams if the gap remains.

Because the two tools do not measure the same thing. Bit.ly counts a click the moment the user clicks the link. Affilae counts it when the destination page loads, which amounts to measuring sessions. Repeated clicks, bots and unintentional clicks therefore inflate the Bit.ly figure.

Because of the session duration. Two identical clicks from the same user, on the same IP, inside that duration count as a single unique click. The number of unique clicks is therefore always lower than the number of gross clicks. The setting lives in your program configuration, in the Session duration field.

Yes. With the Geotargeting field, only clicks collected on IPs from the selected countries are tracked and counted. Clicks from elsewhere are ignored and blacklisted, and cannot result in conversions. A partner promoting outside your area will therefore report far fewer clicks in Affilae than in their own tool.

Affilae automatically includes anti-fraud protections for clicks, including the detection of a human mouse movement on the page. These protections filter out part of the bot traffic, which widens the gap with tools that do count those clicks.

Server-to-Server and the API are considered the most reliable methods, because it is the advertiser that brings the collected data back to the source. JavaScript scripts are faster to install, but sensitive to adblockers, cookie banners and implementation mistakes.

Yes, depending on the tracking method implemented. If you run a non-permissive cookie wall and the user refuses consent to the collection of their data, neither the click nor the conversion can be tracked. Adblockers and VPNs cause the same kind of loss.