Reviews
Part of Why programmatic advertising reviews need a scoring method
Check a programmatic advertising product comparison before you sign
A step-by-step method for scoring programmatic advertising product comparisons: set criteria, weight them, verify data claims, then document the decision.
What to take away
- A comparison is only defensible if the criteria and their weights are written down before vendors are scored, not after.
- Each claim on a vendor page needs a primary sourcelegislation, a regulator, or the platform's own documentation.
- In programmatic advertising, consent sits under the UK GDPR and PECR, and most UK vendors implement it through IAB Europe's Transparency & Consent Framework (TCF).
- Score data protection, consent handling and reporting separately, because they fail in different ways.
- Keep the completed scoring sheet. It is the evidence trail if a client or auditor asks why one platform was chosen.
Set the criteria first
Start from the decision you must make, then list the criteria that decide it. A buying team replacing a demand-side platform may care about inventory access, consent handling, reporting granularity and contract exit terms. A smaller agency might weight onboarding support and minimum spend more heavily.
Compare like with like. A demand-side platform (DSP) such as Google's Display & Video 360, The Trade Desk or Amazon DSP buys inventory; a supply-side platform (SSP) such as Magnite or PubMatic sells it. A DSP is not a substitute for an SSP, and a licensed platform is not a substitute for a managed agency service.
The criteria that decide a programmatic buy, in the order most buying teams weight them:
- Consent and lawful basiswhich basis covers each processing activity, and which version of IAB Europe's TCF the vendor supports.
- Inventory and supply pathwhich exchanges and publishers are reachable, and how low-quality or made-for-advertising supply is filtered out.
- Viewabilityhow it is measured, at what threshold, and whether the measurement follows Media Rating Council guidance.
- Brand safety and suitabilitythe blocklists, exclusions and controls available, and who maintains them.
- Fraud and invalid trafficpre-bid filtering, invalid traffic reporting, and any Trustworthy Accountability Group (TAG) certification.
- Log-level data accesswhether bid, win and impression-level data can be exported, and on what terms.
- Reporting granularitywhich dimensions you get, how often they refresh and how long they are kept.
- Onboarding and supportimplementation time, named contacts and training.
- Commercial termsfee basis, minimum spend, contract length and exit notice.
- Data ownership and deletionwho owns the audience and campaign data, and what happens to it on exit.
Criteria to set before demos
- Inventory access
- Consent handling
- Reporting granularity
- Contract exit terms
- Onboarding support
- Minimum spend
Write the criteria before you see a demo. Vendors shape demos around what they do well, and a criteria list written afterwards tends to mirror the last pitch you watched.
For a wider view of how scored comparisons fit into agency buying, our guide to reviews and comparison methods sets out the surrounding process.
Weight and score each option
Weighting forces a choice about what matters most. If consent handling carries a weight of 30 per cent and reporting carries 10 per cent, the arithmetic will show it.
- List the criteria and give each a weight that totals 100 per cent.
- Define what a score of 1, 3 and 5 looks like for every criterion, in plain words.
- Gather evidence for each vendor against each criterion, citing the page or document it came from.
- Score independently, then compare notes as a team and resolve gaps in evidence.
- Total the weighted scores and record any criterion where a vendor failed outright.
- Re-check the two highest-scoring vendors against your own contract and data rules.
A failed criterion should not be averaged away. If a platform cannot show a lawful basis for the data it processes, a strong reporting score does not fix that.
Check the data protection claims
The UK GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018 set the framework for personal data processing in the UK, so any vendor handling audience data sits inside them. PECR — the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations — governs cookies, device storage and electronic marketing alongside them. Ask which lawful basis applies to each processing activity, and get the answer in writing.
The ICO's guidance on choosing a lawful basis for direct marketing explains how consent and legitimate interests differ, which matters when a platform claims consent is built in.
Where a vendor cannot name the lawful basis, treat that as an open item rather than a pass. Smaller advertisers can use the IAB UK SME toolkit to sanity-check what a proportionate setup looks like before committing to a large platform contract.
Most UK vendors implement consent through IAB Europe's Transparency & Consent Framework (TCF). Ask which version the vendor is signed up to — TCF v2.2 is the version to check for — which consent management platform (CMP) records the signals, and what the platform does when a user refuses or later withdraws consent.
Check the vendor, not just the product
A product comparison only holds up if the company behind it does. Before signing:
- Search the ICO's register of fee payers for the vendor's entry, and check the ICO's enforcement pages for any action taken against it.
- Check IAB UK membership and whether the vendor holds IAB UK's Gold Standard certification.
- Ask for the data processing agreement, the sub-processor list and where personal data is transferred.
- Read the contract line by line for audit rights, data ownership, data deletion and return on exit, minimum spend, the basis of the platform fee, contract duration, and termination or exit notice periods.
Document the decision
A comparison that lives only in a slide deck is hard to defend later. Keep the criteria, weights, scores and evidence in one file, with dates and the name of whoever scored each line.
This is where a formal method pays off. Our step-by-step review methodology explains how evidence is gathered and scored so that two reviewers reach comparable results.
Record the runners-up too. If the chosen platform later underperforms, the notes show whether the gap was foreseeable or a genuine change in the market.
Common questions
How many vendors should a comparison cover?
Three to five is usually enough to test the criteria without exhausting the team. Fewer than three rarely shows whether a price is competitive.
Should price be one criterion or a separate decision?
Score price as a weighted criterion alongside the rest, then check the total cost of ownership separately. A low licence fee with heavy onboarding charges can rank worse than it first appears.
What evidence counts for a score?
Primary sources: legislation, regulator guidance, the platform's own documentation, and signed contract terms. Sales claims without a document behind them should be marked as unverified.
How often should the comparison be refreshed?
Review it when a contract renews, when the vendor changes ownership, or when your own criteria change. Otherwise an annual check is a reasonable default.
