
Facebook ad click numbers are inconsistent with other analytics - adarsh_thampy
https://medium.com/@ConversionChamp/what-happens-when-facebook-decides-to-do-click-fraud-43b187b81bc7
======
pdkl95
Facebook has a history of fraud in their other services. Veritasium fell
victim to FB's scams as a publisher a couple years ago[1].

    
    
        I know first-hand that Facebook's advertising model is deeply flawed. When I paid to
        promote my page I gained 80,000 followers in developing countries who didn't care about
        Veritasium (but I wasn't aware of this at the time). They drove my reach and engagement
        numbers down, basically rendering the page useless.
    

They also have a history of encouraging video fraud[2][3].

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVfHeWTKjag)

[2]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6A1Lt0kvMA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6A1Lt0kvMA)

[3]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7tA3NNKF0Q](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t7tA3NNKF0Q)

------
theomega
I think the explanation here is that Facebook tracks clicks on the banners on
their site while the author of this post tracks page views using GA or other
tools. These are two different metrics. In between lies (at least one)
redirect (from Facebooks click tracker to your website) plus a full load of
your website. There are a lot of visitors who click but never make it to the
second link: Be it because they accidentally pressed the link (very likely) or
because they decided otherwise and aborted.

I'd still go with your conclusion that it is difficult for the advertisers to
track whether the ads pay of if you are paying per click. I would not go as
far and say that Facebook is doing fraud or scam.

~~~
samcheng
This is particularly true for mobile, where it's very easy to mistakenly tap
on an ad while attempting to scroll/swipe.

The natural user reaction is to quickly go 'back' by swiping or hitting the
back button, often before promoted site has time to load and fire off its mess
of tracking pixels/javascript.

However, Facebook itself has tracking pixels, and are configurable such that
you can optimize for visitors that reach conditions (e.g. complete a signup).
It makes much more sense to look at costs and ad performance based on these
downstream metrics, vs. looking at banner ad clicks. (As stated in the
article)

~~~
corobo
Watch out when using tracking pixels. I am sorry I've not been able to find
the source yet but in the past Facebook has said that they use them to target
ads at other users if they successfully hit your tracking pixel.

It makes sense that they would as they now know that user is likely to click
ads and follow through, but will in the long run increase your advertising
costs as you're now competing against others for that user

------
Sujan
Comapring apples and oranges.

Facebook ad clicks are not the same thing as advertised website's
uniques/visitors/hits/sessions/whatever. Especially if the latter is using
external tracking that uses JS and tends to be blocked/opt-out by some.

Facebook clicks are really 'clicks', not 'unique people clicking', they are
also not 'successfully redirected after click', maybe not even 'click
successfully finished and not reverted by aborting'. It just means someone
clicked or tapped on the thing used to advertise.

So yes, you get what you pay for, and in the case of Facebook it's their
definition of a 'click' you are paying for.

By the way: You get pretty close to their numbers when using a redirect script
that loads in a few ms and just writes 'hits' to a database and then again
redirects to you to your normal target website. Not 100%, but much better than
using GA or any other external tracking on the target website.

~~~
adarsh_thampy
As I mentioned in one of the earlier comments, the difference in reported
numbers is just too big. Some amount of discrepancy is acceptable.

If people are clicking on FB ads and not landing on our website for whatever
reason, then those are probably bot clicks.

~~~
saddestcatever
What are your thoughts on "accidental clicks"? Say, I accidentally click a
facebook ad while scrolling, then close the new browser window before your
site's analytics scripts load. Would that account for a large difference?

I know that I thick-thumb at least 10 ads for every ad that I intentionally
select.

~~~
softawre
Analytics scripts are at the very top of the HTML file usually, and are one of
the first things loaded. In this case you'd be counted I think.

------
dennisnedry
This is very interesting, especially when using two separate analytics
software to see that Facebook is not producing accurate numbers. Has the
author considered reaching out to a tech journalist and seeing if they'd be
interested in pursuing an investigation? Seems if Facebook has a little heat
on them, they'd at least explain the discrepancy.

~~~
adarsh_thampy
I haven't reached out to any tech journalists. Sent it out ot a few people who
covered FB. Didn't get any response. So didn't pursue the idea.

~~~
dennisnedry
You may want to try leaving a tip for TechCrunch - [http://techcrunch.com/got-
a-tip/](http://techcrunch.com/got-a-tip/)

Another one is Gawker (although are a bit more controversial, but they do like
to stir the pot quite a bit) - tips@gawker.com

If nothing comes of it, thanks for taking the time to post about your
experience with FB Ads.

------
dang
Since the article title is linkbait (if not both misleading and linkbait), we
changed it as the HN guidelines request
([https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)).
But if anyone can suggest a more accurate and neutral title, we can change it
again.

------
orf
> tail /var/log/nginx/access_log | grep 'your_landing_site' | grep 'facebook'
> | wc -l

How about run something like this for an actual concrete number of visitors,
rather than relying on JS tracking? That's much more concrete evidence.

------
petercooper
Reminds me of this thread from a few years ago here on HN when a clothing
company accused Facebook of similar:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4312731](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4312731)
.. _" Facebook was charging us for clicks, yet we could only verify about 20%
of them actually showing up on our site."_ and other stories from HN users.

------
cookiecaper
It should be taken as a given that these networks are going to inflate their
stats and really be more expensive than they look. The conflict of interest
these platforms have in presenting an accurate analysis of clicks v. making
money for clicks is just too intense to expect anything else.

------
harel
I've been working with Facebook's ad api since its alpha days, and I can tell
you that this problem has always been there. This is not just with Facebook -
its a many other mobile/display ad networks as well. That is why clients
insist on using 3rd party tracking solutions - they trust those numbers
better. We are used to seeing discrepancy between reported impressions and
clicks ON the ad platform and those reported by 3rd party tools. Its just the
way its always been, and I've never heard an explanation that sounded
plausible enough to be repeated to a client.

------
kylehotchkiss
Few thoughts:

* Was your GA reporting period covering the day? The reporting always defaults to up until yesterday for me

* AdBlockers! Facebook click tracking may use backend metrics while GA is frontend, and blocked by various adblockers.

I've really enjoyed Segment.io, you can track GA page views etc via the
backend which could provide better metrics ¯\\_(ツ)_/¯

------
rdlecler1
We tried using FB ads and the differences in what FB was reporting and actual
traffic were pretty big. It felt like one giant advertising scam and we shut
it down a couple years ago. It may work very well for certain consumer
segments but I greatly question the numbers they report. It's not a company
that has earned my trust.

------
inesf
I am a fresh graduate and I am working for the digital marketing department.
Any suggestions on tracking the clicks on Facebook? It would be better if the
tool can integrate different social platforms.

~~~
adarsh_thampy
If you want to track only link clicks, then use a URL shortener like bitly.
They give you analytics for free.

If you want to track the actual users on your website, use any of the
analytics products available- Google Analytics, Open Web Analytics, Piwik,
etc.

Adding UTM parameters to your URLs is the ideal way to attribute website
traffic. Just make sure you are consistent in your UTM values.

~~~
pcora
all of these can be faked. if you really want accurate information, server
logs are the best. the only thing facebook or users can't block.

if facebook says you got all the clicks, use the server logs to show
otherwise.

\-- edit. I'm not saying that I trust facebook though. I don't.

~~~
rixed
Of course users can fake server logs, since Referrer info is totally up to the
client. Also, I'd argue it's harder to distinguish a bot from a real user from
the server logs than from js.

------
nezo
I experienced this fraud as well, and knowing their policy about default
reaching... this is a real shame. We ended up doing less and less facebook
ads.

------
RantyDave
Oh, look, it does't actually matter. What matters is whether or not
advertising on Facebook, or anywhere else, actually makes you more money.
Instrument that, calculate bang/buck et voila.

~~~
BEEdwards
So you didn't make it to the end. That was the conclusion.

    
    
      Should you stop Facebook ads? Depends on actual ROI. Look at your business data and see if Facebook has been working for you.

