Here’s what I think about Engaged-View Attribution...
(If you don’t know what this is, watch my last video)
Engaged-View Attribution is a step in a new direction when it comes to counting and optimizing for conversions. It puts greater value on someone who is deeply engaged with a video before they convert.
Unfortunately, this has some pretty significant holes.
If you use compare attribution settings and notice very few of your view-through conversions are engaged-view, that may lead to false assumptions. You may think that means you are only getting low-quality view-through conversions of people who don’t click your ad. That may make you think that the numbers are inflated.
The problem is that this only applies to SKIPPABLE video ads. Meta isn’t even clear what placements are defined as skippable, but it seems to include:
- In-Stream
- Facebook and Instagram Reels
- Any of the Stories placements
It doesn’t include Facebook or Instagram feeds, among others. So, if someone views at least 10 seconds of your video in their news feed, doesn’t click, and then converts within a day, it won’t be counted as engaged-view.
That’s kinda weird. So, these numbers are likely to be misleading and incomplete.
Also, why stop with video? Someone could be deeply engaged with my ad, even if it isn’t a video. They could read it, react to it, share it, or comment on it. If they don’t click to my website and then convert within a day, it’s a view-through conversion. But you could certainly also define THAT as engaged-view. Why limit this to videos -- and skippable videos -- only?
Bottom line, I think Engaged-View is flawed but super interesting. It could be a sign of more to come related to Meta conversion attribution.
What do you think?
