Which Header Bidding Integration is better for you

Header bidding is widely recognized as an effective and advanced programmatic method for publishers to offer ad inventory to numerous SSPs and ad exchanges simultaneously.

The ecosystem is divided into two categories- client-side header bidding and server-side header bidding. There are benefits and pain points to both, and there is no clear-cut advantage of using one format over another. It truly depends on what suits your requirements.

The client-side model provides you with more usable data and cookie-matching abilities that may result in better performance. You have more control and transparency on-demand sources and bids. It is also the most common type of integration in the industry today.

On the flip side, additional scripts in the page header make pages load slowly, leading to a diminished user experience. For users with slow internet connections, this may turn into an absolute nightmare.

The server-side model offers solutions to some of the pain points we experience with client-side header bidding, latency being one of them. It also provides more support for video and other rich-media formats and enables sending bid requests to many buyers simultaneously, without the limitation of network bandwidth.

The server-side integration also takes care of the reporting and revenue collection aspects. Google EBDA collects revenue from all SSPs and transfers it to you in one shot within 20 days. Amazon’s UAM consolidates earnings from all bidders and issues payments on a net 60-day basis (according to their website).

The S2S integration lacks the transparency and control that a publisher can enjoy in the client-side format. On a more technical level, the lack of browser-based user data can also lead to reduced performance.

One thing is for sure, though; we will never recommend combining both models since premium buyers recognize multiple requests sent to the same SSP from two different header bidding integrations and may end up blocking you.

Don’t forget SPO sensitivity when you think about higher revenue and dollars.

How does it all affect video?

As we keep highlighting, video demand is not the same as display header bidding auctions.

The video player is a separate entity that manages its own bidding auction. You need to ensure that your video monetization vendor can support video header bidding and not just the traditional VAST (VPAID) integration, which creates latency on the page and is not as efficient as client-side or S2S header bidding integrations.

Furthermore, your partner should support both integrations within header bidding to enable you to A/B test the format that provides you with the best results for video.

At VIDAZOO, we support both Prebid for client-side integration and EBDA and/or TAM/UAM for server-side integration. We are also a certified Google Video Tech Partner and support Amazon video demand through header bidding for publishers that are specifically interested in those buyers.

In case you have questions or need additional information about which header bidding integration is better for video, feel free to reach out and schedule a call with one of our experts.