#adfrauddetectionsoftware

[mfilterit]

How Top Brands Outsmart Affiliate Brand Bidding with Real-Time Keyword Monitoring?  

Did you know, 15-20% of branded search ad clicks can be hijacked by rogue affiliates- even before your morning coffee! Affiliate marketing has emerged as a central channel for most brands, generating quantifiable returns through partnerships and pay-per-performance arrangements. But with this expansion is a stealthy trap—unauthorized brand keyword bidding by affiliates and unauthorized resellers that quietly eats away at marketing budgets.  

Cannibalizing brand traffic, driving up acquisition costs, and hurting brand experience causes serious harm. And alas, traditional monitoring techniques—manual searching, weekly audits, or simple alert systems—no longer cut it. High-end brands are now turning to smart keyword monitoring systems that not only identify abuse but block it before it happens. 

This blog will discuss about what is brand bidding, why brand bidding hurts, who does this and how to combat it in a smarter way by using ad fraud solutions. 

What is Brand Bidding Abuse in Affiliate Marketing? 

Brand bidding misuse is the improper use by third parties, such as affiliates in many cases, of bidding for a brand's keywords in pay-per-click ads, with an aim to divert traffic and to obtain affiliate revenue through fraudulent methods. mFilterIt reports suggest that large brands often end up uncovering 300-500 affiliate keyword hijacks in a single week. Imagine what happens in an year! 

It manifests in several different ways: 

Brand bidding- Using a brand’s name or misspelling of a brand to surface in PPC listings. 

Direct linking- Redirecting the users directly to the brand website via affiliate links while impersonating the brand. 

Ad hijacking- Copying the brand's exact ad copy and URL structures to look identical to proprietary ads. 

These strategies manipulate attribution models, causing the affiliate to appear as though they caused the conversion. Because they bid higher than the brand to typically rank higher than the brand's native ads or organic results, they essentially "steal" traffic that the brand was going to get organically anyway—but without creating incremental value. 

The greatest challenge? Manual monitoring hardly catches them. AI-ML driven models are needed to evaluate this and optimise keywords for brands and save on organic poaching.  

Why Does Brand Bidding Hurt More Than You Think? 

Brand bidding could be a harmless affiliate hustle, but it can hurt your bottom line quite badly. Here's why: 

Cannibalized Paid & Organic Traffic 

When unauthorized resellers or affiliates bid on your own brand terms, you get your traffic diverted. You pay commission to those users who were already on the lookout for you. 

Skewed Attribution & Inflated CPA 

This manipulates performance stats, inflates your Cost Per Acquisition (CPA), and misleads campaign strategy because organic to performance metrics get skewed.  

Seized Brand Experience & Trust 

These affiliates also cause a brand safety hazard as users can reach old product pages, off-tangent resellers, or fake sites altogether—all negatively impacting customer experience and siphoning off trust. Unapproved offers or prices confuse customers and besmirch your brand's consistency at times. 

Who’s Doing It — and When It’s Most Likely to Happen? 

Brand bidding abuse isn't confined to dirty affiliates alone. It covers- 

Rogue affiliates cloaking or using VPNs to hide location. 

Grey market resellers attempting to take advantage of your branded traffic. 

Competitors using hard-hitting keyword sniping. 

Influencers getting paid for traffic 

And they are most active during- 

Festival periods (such as Diwali, Black Friday, New Year) when search volume is highest. 

Product releases & flash sales when brand interest is highest. 

The opportunity window is small—but it's large enough for them to draw off a piece of your ROI. 

How Leading Brands Are Combating It? 

Smart marketers today are leveraging AI driven real-time, intelligent keyword watch to get a step ahead. This is well beyond keyword notices or weekly reports. Here's how top brands are addressing the issue: 

Geo-targeted Keyword Surveillance 

Rather than using single-location checks, sophisticated systems mimic worldwide user activity—tracking your brand terms from various geographies to identify region-specific misuse. 

Hourly Pattern Tracking 

By breaking down when suspect ads occur—hour by hour—brands can find out if affiliates are gaming the system at and at what time. 

Seasonal Spike Detection 

During peak holiday sales periods, affiliate abuse peaks. Sophisticated systems monitor anomalies in search ad activity, alerting on unusual spikes in brand bidding volume. 

Market Trend Mapping 

Know how competitor keyword bidding and affiliate activity fluctuate throughout significant sales cycles, placing you ahead of the game. 

Ad Copy & Keyword Duplication Analysis 

Detect when third parties copy your ad creatives—the unmistakable hallmark of ad hijacking. 

Real-time Alerts & Anomaly Detection 

Advance ad fraud solutions—such as Valid8 from mFilterIt—provide instant alerts when irregular activity is detected, allowing swift takedown or compliance measures to be taken. 

These systems impart accuracy, size, and pace that manual action simply can't achieve. 

What Makes the AI Approach Exclusive? 

The distinction is intelligence. 

Traditional affiliate monitoring tools operate after the fact—alerting a handful of naughty actors once harm has already been done. But top-tier solutions integrate predictive analytics, real-time tracking, and anomaly detection to catch the problem before it can propagate. 

This is what separates them: 

Multi-dimensional data smarts rather than isolated keyword lists 

Historical and behavioural trend-based predictive detection 

Lower media spend leakage by shutting down non-compliant traffic sources 

Enhanced campaign effectiveness, as only valuable affiliates are left behind 

Two benefits in one: Brand safety and performance optimization 

It's no longer only about compliance—it's about making your media spend smarter. 

Conclusion  

Affiliate brand bidding isn't simply a pesky leak—it's a strategic danger. Yet to shrewd marketers, it's also a strategic advantage. Those who make the investment in clever keyword watching don't only safeguard brands—instead, they optimize spend, enhance performance, and uncover competitive real-time insight.    In fact, visibility equates to control—and control equates to growth. 

[mfilterit]

Maximizing Impact During IPL: Why Smart Brands Focus on Ad Monitoring, Frequency Capping & Fraud Prevention

The Indian Premier League (IPL) continues to shatter records, not just on the field but also in the advertising arena. The 2025 season has witnessed a remarkable 29% increase in the number of advertisers compared to the previous year, with over 55 brands vying for attention during the first five matches alone.

However, with this vast opportunity comes significant risk. The surge in advertising can lead to overspending, ad fatigue among viewers, and an uptick in fraudulent activities targeting high-profile events like the IPL.

This blog explores how strategic implementation of ad monitoring, frequency capping, and fraud detection can be the difference between a successful IPL campaign and a costly misstep.

What will your brand get out of IPL advertising?

Here are the benefits your brand will get out of IPL advertising:

Fast Massive Reach

The Indian Premier League (IPL) isn’t just a cricket tournament — it’s a nationwide spectacle with a global fanbase. In the 2024 season, the IPL reached a cumulative audience of 546 million viewers on television alone, with digital platforms like JioCinema attracting an additional 620 million viewers. This unparalleled reach offers brands instant national visibility.

For brands, this means instant national visibility. Doesn’t matter if you’re launching a new product or driving top-of-funnel awareness, IPL advertising is your opening batsman — aggressive, high-impact, and out to make a statement from ball one.

In most media environments, building this kind of reach would take weeks, even months. With IPL, it can happen in a matter of days, sometimes even overnight. You’re not just reaching people — you’re entering living rooms, conversations, and social media feeds in real time.

Hyper-Engaged Audience

IPL viewers are not just numerous; they are deeply engaged. During the 2024 season, JioCinema reported that viewers spent an average of 75 minutes per session, up from over 60 minutes in the previous season. This substantial time spent indicates a highly captivated audience, providing brands with extended exposure and increased opportunities for message retention.

A neuroscience study revealed that during IPL 2024, viewers exhibited 1.2 times higher attention to ads on connected TVs compared to linear TV, and brand equity increased by 1.5 times on connected TVs. This heightened engagement translates to more effective advertising, as audiences are more receptive and responsive to brand messages during the tournament.

Better Brand Recall

Repeated exposure during the IPL significantly enhances brand recall. The tournament’s high-frequency matches and extensive viewership provide multiple touchpoints for audiences to internalize brand messages.

Integrating advertisements with specific in-game moments, such as boundaries or wickets, further amplifies recall. For instance, Cadbury Dairy Milk’s #ThankYouFirstCoach campaign during IPL 2024, which featured heartfelt tributes to cricketers’ first coaches, resonated deeply with audiences and reinforced brand association.

By now you’ve understood the massive opportunity IPL advertising is. But over the years, there’s been a marked increase in programmatic ad buys and real-time bidding (RTB). Platforms like JioCinema have enabled precise audience targeting, allowing brands to bid dynamically for premium ad slots in real time. While this opens up opportunities for better efficiency and control, it also intensifies competition.

With thousands of brands vying for the same inventory, standing out without overspending becomes a strategic challenge. The very speed and scale of programmatic — if not managed carefully — can lead to frequency spikes, wasted impressions, or audience fatigue. For smart advertisers, this creates an opportunity: those who can balance agility with optimization can win both attention and efficiency.

To know more about Combined Monitoring, FCAP, and Fraud Prevention click here

[mfilterit]

How Fraudsters Manipulate App Installs and What Marketers Can Do About It?

Mobile apps are big business and the same is apparent through the significant advertising budgets dedicated to increasing app installs. In 2022 alone, advertisers spent more than $18 billion on advertising their apps to drive more installs. This makes the app install advertising business lucrative.  

Unfortunately, this lure also attracts bad actors and frauds. That’s perhaps why, today, app install fraud is one of the most common forms of ad fraud in the online realm. According to our analysis, we have found that on IOS, the average fraud at the install level is 57% which rapidly increases to 70% on Android devices.  

Fraudsters use fake app installs to steal from advertising budgets. The financial impact of this, while significant, is only a small part of all the trouble caused for the advertisers as a result of these activities. What’s more troublesome is that fraudsters are evolving their methods and employing sophisticated methods to carry out their fraudulent activities.   

In times like these, advertisers need to start ahead of the curve to protect their ad budgets. To do this, one must first understand how app install fraud works and that’s exactly what the next section describes. Read on. 

The Hidden Tactics Behind Install Fraud

While it may seem like app install fraud is a single threat, the reality is much more complex. Fraudsters utilize several simple and complex methods to fake installs and steal from advertisers’ budgets. Here’s a quick overview of the most common methods employed by app install fraudsters: 

– Click Injection:

This is one of the most sophisticated forms of app install fraud. To execute this, fraudsters publish an app that “listens” for app download broadcasts. Using this information, they can “inject” a click right before an app install is completed. This allows fraudsters to claim the credit for the app install despite not contributing anything to make it happen. 

– Click Spamming:

Click spamming is usually employed to target campaigns where advertisers are paying for clicks on their ads. As the name suggests, fraudsters generate a large number of fake clicks, usually using bots, and claim the rewards. However, the advertiser unfortunately ends up paying for clicks that will not result in any genuine interest or installs of their application. 

– Organic Hijacking:

Another sophisticated form of app install fraud; organic hijacking works by stealing the credit of organic installs. Fraudsters employ malware or other methods to send a fake click right before an app download is completed, claiming the credit for the app installs, along with the associated reward.  

– Incent traffic:

This type of app install fraud is one of the most difficult to detect, as it uses real users to scam advertisers. In this type of fraud, fraudsters place ads on incent walls and incentivize real users to download an application and in some cases, complete an action that claims the reward. In many cases, fraudsters straight out share a part of their affiliate payout with the user. While there are real users involved and the app download is also authentic, since the user is only interested in the reward, the entire activity doesn’t drive any value for the advertiser.  

– SDK Spoofing:

With SDK Spoofing, fraudsters usually use a malware-laced app of their own to infect user devices. This app then manipulates the SDK communication of the advertisers’ apps to generate fake installs and register other actions that may be rewarded by the advertiser. Alarmingly, such an activity is extremely difficult to track and can be conducted indefinitely, effectively draining entire ad budgets without delivering any real value.  

But Aren’t Fraud Checks by MMPs Enough?  

to know more, click here

[mfilterit]

CTV Ad Fraud Uncovered: Key Threats and Strategies for Smarter Ad Investments 

As Connected TV (CTV) advertising grows, criminals find newer ways to exploit its vulnerabilities. CTV ad fraud is now a massive, blown-up issue for advertisers, which ultimately results in wastage of ad spend and misleading performance metrics for the advertising campaigns. Unlike digital advertising, there's no industry-wide standardization in CTV, which offers the perfect playground for fraudsters. 

In this blog will focus on CTV ad fraud, important concerns such as frequency capping breach, threats to brand safety, and issues with viewable impressions, as well as how these affect advertisers. We'll also discuss strategic approaches for preventing fraud to maximize successful ad placements on CTV platforms. 

What are the Issues Concerned with CTV Ad Fraud? 

Violation of Frequency Capping 

Violation of Frequency capping when fraudsters manipulate CTV inventory to serve excessive impressions beyond limits. They loop ads in non-viewable environments, inflate impressions by spoofing device IDs, and reset ad requests to bypass restrictions. This practice drains ad budgets, distort camp 

Brand Safety Concerns 

Brand safety is a major consideration for advertisers: that a brand's ads will only run in suitable environments. CTV fraud threatens brands in varied ways: 

Fake Inventory- Scammers shower ad space on premium quality CTV apps but send them to low-quality or unsuitable content. 

Domain Spoofing- Scammers impersonate authoritative publishers to convince advertisers into buying fake impressions. 

Lack of Transparency- Most CTV ads are placed programmatically which creates more challenges to track the actual place where an ad runs. 

Viewability Issues 

Viewability becomes significant in determining whether an ad is looked at by users. Fraud essentially dilutes the real ad engagements by: 

Ad Stacking- Ads stacked on each other; just the uppermost ad is displayed on the screen. 

Pixel Stuffing- Ads are technically "served" in one-pixel size but never made visible. 

Misleading Reporting- Ad fraudsters forge logs to simulate high engagement. 

Impact of these Issues on CTV Ad Fraud 

The existence of CTV ad fraud has drastic implications for publishers, advertisers, and the ad ecosystem as a whole: 

Wasted Ad Spend – Brands invest huge budgets on fake impressions rather than real user interaction. This translates to lost marketing dollars that can be used on legitimate ad placements and performance-based campaigns. 

Manipulated Campaign Metrics – Deceptive behaviour tricks advertisers into thinking their adverts are doing great, distorting essential performance measures (KPIs) like click-through rates (CTR) and conversions. This may cause uninformed decisions in subsequent marketing strategies. 

Erosion of Trust in CTV Advertisements – If not managed, CTV fraud can demotivate advertisers from spending money on the platform. Brands would shift their ad budgets to other digital ad media that offer superior transparency and accountability. 

Poor ROI and Lower Conversions – Despite the high impression volume, fraudulent traffic does not contribute to actual conversions, which can affect revenue. Brands can have decreasing engagement levels, lower customer acquisition, and lower lifetime value from fraud-infected campaigns. 

Damage to Reputation for Publishers – Publishers and sites that unwittingly host fraudulent behavior can suffer damage to their reputations, and this can cause a loss of advertiser partnerships and revenue. 

Impact on Reach Vs Impressions – Due to frequency capping, ads may generate high impression counts but fail to reach new and relevant audiences. Instead, the same users see repetitive ads, leading to overexposure, ad fatigue and frustration. This stagnation can reduce engagement, harm brand perception, and ultimately diminish the effectiveness of ad campaigns. 

Strategies to Combat CTV Ad Fraud 

Fighting CTV ad fraud means employing a multi-pronged proactive approach. Advertisers must employ sturdy solutions to validate their campaigns. Here are some important techniques: 

Leverage CTV-Specific Ad Fraud Detection Tools 

Deploy a solution like Ad Fraud Detection by mFilterIt for detecting and blocking the fraudulent traffic. 

Use machine learning-based detection techniques to spot anomalies and flag suspicious activities. 

Employ ad verification tools to ensure the ads will reach the desired audience in brand-safe environments. 

Regular Monitoring of Campaign Metrics 

Monitor in real-time the ad performances and analyze patterns of engagements. 

Detect odd spikes in impressions, click-throughs, and conversions that may indicate fraudulent behavior. 

Cross-validate the data from various demand-side platforms (DSPs) to spot any anomalies. 

Conclusion 

CTV ad fraud is becoming one of the most notable threats to advertisers, with frequency capping violations, brand safety threats, and viewability issues being some of the prominent ones. Its impacts can extend beyond wasted ad spend; it distorts performance metrics, undermines trustworthiness, and lessens the return on investment 

To fight CTV ad fraud effectively, advertisers must install sophisticated detection technologies, ensure transparency in ad placement, closely follow campaigns, and leverage first-party data for targeting. Brands can defend their ad spend and ensure their CTV campaigns yield tangible results if they take a proactive approach and invest in fraud prevention solutions such as Valid8 from mFilterIt. 

As CTV advertising continues to evolve, staying one step ahead of scammers is paramount to drive digital ad campaign performance. In addition to upping the ante on campaign effectiveness, investment in brand safety and anti-fraud initiatives would enhance both safety and trust in the advertising ecosystem. 

[mfilterit]

Types of Mobile Advertising Fraud Across Industries

India has witnessed an exponential rise in smartphone usage, internet penetration, which has furthered the growth of the Indian Digital Advertising ecosystem. Studies estimate that there were 624 million Internet users in India by January 2021 and the number of mobile connections was equivalent to 79% of the total population (1.39 billion is the current population).

The growth in internet adoption, smartphone usage, and the ongoing Covid19 pandemic has impelled businesses to leverage digital marketing to reach their customers directly on their mobile devices.

This growth, however, comes with its own set of challenges as the internet has become a playground for fraudsters MMA India Report states that 62% of all digital ad fraud occurs on mobile advertising, the most dominant type of digital advertising in India. Increased mobile adoption opens Pandora’s box of opportunities for digital criminals. Thus, one of the many reasons to develop an understanding of the different types of mobile ad fraud and how to detect them across industries.

The ever-evolving ecosystem of mobile devices allows advertisers to deploy ads in varied formats. This provides the fraudsters with a number of ways in which they can trick their victims: from fake installs to attribution manipulation.

Let us have a look at the different types of ad fraud in mobile advertising which are fairly common across industries.

Click here to read more: Types of Mobile Advertising Fraud Across Industries.

[mfilterit]

Click Tracker: Measurement and Validation of Clicks to prevent ad fraud and click-fraud prevention

Ensuring the legitimacy of clicks is a key performance measurement metric for marketers and businesses. Verification backed with accurate measures leads to optimized performance. Click Tracking ensures all invalid traffic is identified before it drains the ad budget and skews ad campaign performance data.  Let’s delve deeper to understand the need for click tracking and how it can help in campaign optimization.  

READ MORE>>

[mfilterit]

Marketing Team vs. Call Center Team: Who’s to Blame When Leads Don’t Convert?

Junk leads are more than just data in the CRM; they create a cycle of wasted efforts for both teams: 

Lost Time on Unproductive Calls: Call center agents spend precious time on leads that lack any genuine interest in the product, draining their morale and productivity. It’s frustrating for agents to encounter frequent rejections, impacting their motivation and performance. 

Strain on Marketing Resources: For marketing, the push for high numbers of leads can come at the expense of quality. Campaigns are evaluated on how many leads they generate, even if many are unlikely to convert. This can lead to a misplaced focus on quantity over quality, which ultimately fails both teams. 

Unmet Conversion Goals: For both marketing and the call center, junk leads directly affect the bottom line. Marketing sees low ROI on its campaigns, and the call center fails to hit conversion targets. In the end, this hurts the business by diverting resources from potential sales opportunities to unqualified leads. 

Read more: Junk leads

[mfilterit]

Why do advertisers need to keep a check on their Reengagement campaigns?

Event spoofing involves fraudsters simulating user actions after a re-engagement campaign, such as fake logins, purchases, or app interactions. These fabricated events create the illusion that the campaign successfully drove meaningful engagement. However, these activities lack any real user intent or value, resulting in wasted ad spend and unreliable performance data. Event spoofing is particularly harmful because it often goes undetected until a deeper analysis reveals discrepancies between reported metrics and actual user behavior. 

Impact of Fraud on Re-Engagement Campaigns 

Financial Losses and Wasted Ad Spend: Re-engagement campaigns are designed to maximize ROI by targeting users who are already familiar with the brand. However, when fraudsters interfere, ad budgets are wasted on fake actions that provide no real value. For example, event spoofing may create the illusion of reactivated users completing high-value actions, such as purchases or logins, while in reality, no such engagement has occurred. This not only drains resources but also diverts funds from genuine opportunities to re-engage actual users.

Misleading Campaign Performance Data: Fraudulent activities in re-engagement campaigns can significantly distort performance metrics. Organic poaching and acquisition poaching, for instance, lead to inflated figures, making campaigns appear more successful than they truly are. When marketers rely on these skewed insights, they risk misallocating budgets, overestimating campaign effectiveness, and losing the ability to optimize future strategies effectively.

Read more about Impact of ad Fraud

[mfilterit]

Is Your Ad Fraud Verification Partner Using the Latest Technology?

To protect the ad spends, the marketers need to adopt an advanced technique to combat the impact of ad fraud. For validating the ad traffic and helping advertisers get transparency of their traffic quality, there are ad verification solution providers.

These verification partners play a crucial role in combatting ad fraud. They help advertisers understand whether their ads are seen by bots or humans.

Advertisers, this question is for you: Is your ad fraud verification partner doing enough to protect your ads from ad fraud? More specifically, is your ad verification partner keeping up with the latest technology to protect your ad spends and ensure transparency in your campaigns?

Let us help you decode this contact us: Is Your Ad Fraud Verification Partner Using the Latest Technology?

[mfilterit]

Ad Fraud Prevention: Beyond viewability and impression validation with Full Funnel Protection

Impression Fraud analysis is better at the post-bid stage than pre-bid, measuring performance beyond viewability metrics. In pre-bid analysis, i.e. before the ad is served, fraud can be identified based on only two parameters, IP and User Agents. Also, the time for analysis is limited to 10 milliseconds. This results in a meager 2% fraud identification.    

This is where a post-bid analysis trumps a pre-bid impression validation. Now that we have several more parameters fraud detection is done on deterministic and heuristic measures as well. This results in the detection of higher invalid impressions of 15-20%.  This results in improved ROI on Ad spending. Post-bid analysis is a more beneficial method for detecting ad fraud.

As viewability is not a measure to detect fraud, most of our competition focuses on advertisers spending an average of 15% of their programmatic budget on MFA sites, but some may spend as much as 42%. While 35% of programmatic spending is wasted on low-value environments like MFA sites.   By focusing on robust ad fraud detection advertisers can combat the various forms of fraud that undermine their campaigns across digital advertising platforms. Prioritizing impression validation is essential for maximizing return on investment and maintaining trust in the advertising ecosystem. 

To read more visit: Ad Fraud Prevention Beyond viewability and impression validation.

[mfilterit]

Protection from Brand Bidding with AI and Automations for Brands and Ad Networks

Brand bidding fraud costs approx. $1.3 billion each year as competitors bid on branded keywords. Over 60% of brand terms are targeted by competitors, inflating cost-per-click (CPC) by up to 30% and reducing conversion rates by 5-10%. This not only drives up advertising costs but also dilutes brand recognition, as 50% of users may click on a competitor’s ad when searching for a brand name. This leads to confusion and lost customers.  

Businesses must actively monitor and optimize their paid search campaigns while implementing robust brand safety solutions to mitigate these risks. 

To read more visit: Protection from Brand Bidding

[mfilterit]

Ad Fraud Prevention across Programmatic advertising landscape in the USA

Improved Placement Strategy with Ad Fraud Prevention: The programmatic strategy was refined to ensure ads appeared in high-quality, well-spaced placements, preventing ad stuffing and ad stacking. By focusing on premium ad placements, Chevron ensured that each ad had the intended impact without the budget being wasted on oversaturated slots.  

Enhanced Brand Safety Filters: Deployed advanced AI and machine learning to analyze page content and assess ad placement quality in real-time. This significantly reduced instances of ads being displayed alongside inappropriate or brand-damaging content. 

Blacklisting all the traffic anomalies resulted in significant improvement in their traffic and ultimately resulted in improved conversion rates of 5% and increased ROI on digital spending by 14%.    

To Read More Visit: Ad Fraud Prevention across Programmatic advertising

[mfilterit]

Is Your Ad Fraud Verification Partner Using the Latest Technology?

Advertisers, this question is for you: Is your ad fraud verification partner doing enough to protect your ads from ad fraud? More specifically, is your ad verification partner keeping up with the latest technology to protect your ad spends and ensure transparency in your campaigns?

To protect the ad spends, the marketers need to adopt an advanced technique to combat the impact of ad fraud. For validating the ad traffic and helping advertisers get transparency of their traffic quality, there are ad verification solution providers.

Visit to read more: Ad Fraud Verification

[mfilterit]

Mobile Ad Fraud: Challenges for Advertisers in the USA

The mobile app ecosystem is growing and evolving and expanding across the global especially in the BFSI industries, the rise of Fintech apps and lending apps has also raised the stake of fraud prevention in app ecosystem.  Most app fraud prevention apps don’t cover the sophisticated and dynamic nature of ad frauds that lead to fake installs and thereby low return on investment.  

Here are some of the major challenges:  

Organic hijacking via Click Spam: Theft of organic traffic is one of the biggest hurdles in mobile app advertising. Deceptive techniques to mimic legitimate installs and generate traffic that appears organic, resulting in inflated numbers that distort performance metrics. It leads to skewed insights for advertisers who rely on authentic user data and affects the return on investment (ROI).   

To read more visit: Mobile Ad Fraud