Ad Manager partner management publishers typically have different costs associated with various inventory sources. Partner management allows you to use track assignments to define your relationship with each partner and control how impressions should serve to their inventory.
You can optimize your margins by placing a weight on individual track assignments more likely to have a higher fill-rate, relative to other inventory sources.
Learn how to add and configure a track assignment, including how to activate fill-rate optimization.
CMS metadata targeting is not supported with fill-rate optimization.
If you enable fill-rate optimization for a track assignment, any applied CMS metadata targeting is ignored in serving distribution. Because the CMS metadata targeting is ignored, track assignments configured this way apply to a broader targeting set and may cause the fill rate to apply to additional eligible line items.
Reporting for the track assignment based on CMS metadata continues to be supported.
Example
The scenarios below show a simplified version of how fill-rate optimization might significantly increase profit when delivery is weighted toward the channels you've configured as more profitable in your track assignments.
This is an exaggerated example, demonstrating the effect of enabling fill-rate optimization and weighting competing partner sites to control fill rate and gross margins. These scenarios do not take into account other factors, such as delivery schedules, or competition from goal-based line items.
A campaign is sold for 1,000,000 impressions with a $20 CPM. The network generates $20,000 in revenue for this campaign, from which the publisher costs for serving those impressions are deducted.
Scenario 1: Not configured to use fill-rate optimization
In this scenario, the network has not activated "fill-rate optimization" in the track assignments for these partner sites. Because of this, the impressions are generally split evenly between partner sites, without regard to serving cost, netting a profit of $7,500 after the costs have been deducted.
| Fill-rate optimization weight |
Fill rate | Impressions served |
Publisher serving cost |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Partner site A ($10 CPM) |
n/a | 50% | 500,000 | $5,000 |
| Partner site B ($15 CPM) |
n/a | 50% | 500,000 | $7,500 |
Gross margin: ($20,000) - ($5,000 + $7,500) = $7,500
Scenario 2: Configured to use fill-rate optimization
In this scenario, the network has activated "fill-rate optimization" in the track assignments for these partner sites configuring Partner site A with a higher weight of 8 and Partner site B with a lower weight of 2. Because of this, the fill rate is optimized to serve more impressions to the higher weight, lower-cost Partner A inventory, netting a profit of $9,000 after the costs have been deducted.
| Fill-rate optimization weight |
Fill rate | Impressions served |
Publisher serving cost |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Partner site A ($10 CPM) |
8 | 80% | 800,000 | $8,000 |
| Partner site B ($15 CPM) |
2 | 20% | 200,000 | $3,000 |
Gross margin: ($20,000) - ($8,000 + $3,000) = $9,000
