RevenueHits VS Google Adsense: Who Pays More?
A comparison in the field in January 2016
posted on February 3 , 2016 By Davis Molinari
The RevenueHits network continues to be painted by many websites as the best alternative for Google Adsense. In some previous publications, I described the results of the first test with this advertising circuit and conducted an analysis of the most profitable type of traffic in terms of geographic origin. In today's article, I want instead to illustrate the results of a direct "in the field" comparison between the two networks, Adsense and RevenueHits, held in January 2016.
The first step was to decide how many ads and what type, for each of the two circuits, to insert in the blog pages. After doing a little practice, I found a setting that seemed acceptable and, essentially, the terms on which the analysis occurred were as follows:
Adsense:
2 banner
1 rating table 728 X 90 of the type "image + text" placed at the top, just above the title of the article
1 rectangular banner of size of 336 X 280, positioned at the beginning of the article in the upper left corner, with a left alignment in relation to the text
RevenueHits:
1 single announcement of type "shadow box"
The results obtained in a one-month observation interval were as follows:
Google Adsense:
Impressions: 16074
Click: 13
eCPM: $ 0.57
Revenue: $ 9.13
Google Adsense January 2016 Income
RevenueHits:
Impressions: 7519
Click: 368
eCPM: $ 1.26
Revenue: $ 9.51
RevenueHits January 2016 Income
Looking at the simple and simple data, we noticed that RevenueHits generated more revenue than Adsense.
But we need to delve deeper into and consider the types of ads.
After several tests with the types of ads provided by RevenueHits, I came to the conclusion that "Shadow Box" is the most lucrative. But that does not come for free, but it depends on whether it's a very invasive type of ad; It is in fact a flag in the foreground, placed on a layer of transparency that spans the entire page, and with each click opens a new browser window with an advertising site.
Adsense users, instead, were standard "embedded" banners in the page layout also defined with a "text and style" customized with the site's colors, which made them even more "amalgamated" in the case of ads only from text.
Also the geographical origin of the traffic directed to the site greatly affects the revenue generated by the two different networks. With RevenueHits, for example, $ 8.03 of $ 9.51 was generated by traffic coming from the United States to the second country, Canada, which contributed only 42 cents and the others, from the third, to contributed insignificantly. With Google Adsense, revenue was generated more distributed by several countries with the US, even here in the lead, which brought "only" $ 3.88 of the $ 9.13, but with Sweden second that provides $ 1.10 and with 3 other countries above 50 cents each.
This, in essence, is the result of direct comparison between Adsense and RevenueHits made over a period of a month. Here everything is summarized in a list of PRO and CONS for each network:
Adsense
PRO:
High-quality and relevant
ads Non-invasive ads
Useful traffic distributed among many origins
CONS:
ECPM Low
RevenueHits:
PRO:
High ECPM
CONS:
CREATE ACCOUNT REVENUEHITS
Very Invasive
Ads Poor Ads
Traffic Useful Only from US, Canada (and Partly Australia)
posted on February 3 , 2016 By Davis Molinari
The RevenueHits network continues to be painted by many websites as the best alternative for Google Adsense. In some previous publications, I described the results of the first test with this advertising circuit and conducted an analysis of the most profitable type of traffic in terms of geographic origin. In today's article, I want instead to illustrate the results of a direct "in the field" comparison between the two networks, Adsense and RevenueHits, held in January 2016.
The first step was to decide how many ads and what type, for each of the two circuits, to insert in the blog pages. After doing a little practice, I found a setting that seemed acceptable and, essentially, the terms on which the analysis occurred were as follows:
Adsense:
2 banner
1 rating table 728 X 90 of the type "image + text" placed at the top, just above the title of the article
1 rectangular banner of size of 336 X 280, positioned at the beginning of the article in the upper left corner, with a left alignment in relation to the text
RevenueHits:
1 single announcement of type "shadow box"
The results obtained in a one-month observation interval were as follows:
Google Adsense:
Impressions: 16074
Click: 13
eCPM: $ 0.57
Revenue: $ 9.13
Google Adsense January 2016 Income
RevenueHits:
Impressions: 7519
Click: 368
eCPM: $ 1.26
Revenue: $ 9.51
RevenueHits January 2016 Income
Looking at the simple and simple data, we noticed that RevenueHits generated more revenue than Adsense.
But we need to delve deeper into and consider the types of ads.
After several tests with the types of ads provided by RevenueHits, I came to the conclusion that "Shadow Box" is the most lucrative. But that does not come for free, but it depends on whether it's a very invasive type of ad; It is in fact a flag in the foreground, placed on a layer of transparency that spans the entire page, and with each click opens a new browser window with an advertising site.
Adsense users, instead, were standard "embedded" banners in the page layout also defined with a "text and style" customized with the site's colors, which made them even more "amalgamated" in the case of ads only from text.
Also the geographical origin of the traffic directed to the site greatly affects the revenue generated by the two different networks. With RevenueHits, for example, $ 8.03 of $ 9.51 was generated by traffic coming from the United States to the second country, Canada, which contributed only 42 cents and the others, from the third, to contributed insignificantly. With Google Adsense, revenue was generated more distributed by several countries with the US, even here in the lead, which brought "only" $ 3.88 of the $ 9.13, but with Sweden second that provides $ 1.10 and with 3 other countries above 50 cents each.
This, in essence, is the result of direct comparison between Adsense and RevenueHits made over a period of a month. Here everything is summarized in a list of PRO and CONS for each network:
Adsense
PRO:
High-quality and relevant
ads Non-invasive ads
Useful traffic distributed among many origins
CONS:
ECPM Low
RevenueHits:
PRO:
High ECPM
CONS:
CREATE ACCOUNT REVENUEHITS
Very Invasive
Ads Poor Ads
Traffic Useful Only from US, Canada (and Partly Australia)
Comentários
Postar um comentário