At a glance
Spend on StackAdapt placements (publisher domains, app bundles, audience segments) that drove zero attributed conversions in the window. The “obvious savings” number; this is money that produced impressions/clicks but no purchases. DSP is multi-channel and multi-touch, so wait at least 14 days before acting; CTV and display view-through can take 3, 7 days to surface and BidCore is exploring constantly.
| What it counts | Spend (account currency) summed across publisher domains, app bundles, and audience segments that recorded zero conversions in the window but non-zero impressions/clicks. StackAdapt has no concept of “keywords”; the dimension is publisher/segment. |
| Cost basis | Whatever the campaign was bidding on (CPM, CPC, BidCore CPA target). |
| Currency | Account currency. |
| Conversion attribution | Click-through + view-through within the configured window. A placement whose impression later converted via Search is zero-conv here unless StackAdapt’s view-through window claimed it. |
| Attribution window | 30/1 default. CTV-heavy accounts should use 30/7 view-through; otherwise CTV placements look “wasted” when they’re not. |
| Bot / invalid traffic | IVT-filtered; minor leakage <2%. |
| Time window | 30D. |
| Alert trigger | >$0 (any zero-conv placement). Practical: worth acting on when wasted spend > 6% of total spend AND offending placements have >7 days of activity. |
| Roles | owner, marketing, finance |
Calculation
Calculated automatically from your StackAdapt data. See the At a glance summary above for what the metric tracks and the worked example below for a typical reading.Worked example
The same US homeware brand. Window 02 Apr 26 to 01 May 26. Total spend $44,000.| Placement | Channel | Spend ($) | Impressions | Clicks | Conversions | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| premium publisher rotation | Display | 8,200 | 2.4M | 4,200 | 142 | Convertible |
| nytimes.com | Display | 3,400 | 1.1M | 1,800 | 68 | Convertible |
| espn.com (CTV pre-roll) | CTV | 4,200 | 320k | n/a | 22 (view-through) | Convertible |
| buzzfeed.com (display) | Display | 840 | 480k | 920 | 0 | Wasted, 18 days |
| app: candy crush (in-app display) | In-App | 620 | 620k | 140 | 0 | Wasted, audience mismatch |
| streaming audio: regional sports | Audio | 480 | 180k | 22 | 0 | Wasted, 21 days |
| app: weather widget | In-App | 380 | 920k | 84 | 0 | Wasted, click-fraud suspect |
| Other (60 placements, all converting) | mixed | 25,880 | 4.2M | 11,234 | 562 | |
| Total wasted (this card) | $2,320 | 2.2M | 1,166 | 0 | 5.3% of total spend |
- 5.3% wasted spend is healthy band for a multi-channel DSP account; healthy DSP runs 4, 8% wasted. No structural issue here, but the candidates flagged are still actionable.
- The weather widget app ($380) is suspicious for click-fraud. 84 clicks on 920k impressions = 0.009% CTR; legitimate display CTR is 0.1, 0.4%. This is bot traffic that StackAdapt’s IVT filter missed; in-app weather widgets are a known low-quality bundle. Action: add to the bundle block list across all campaigns.
- Candy Crush in-app ($620) is genuine audience mismatch. Mobile gaming audiences don’t convert on homeware; the demographics overlap is poor. Add to block list and revisit if you launch a more impulse-purchase product line.
- buzzfeed.com display ($840) is borderline. The 920 clicks suggest engagement but no conversions despite 18 days of activity. Likely cause: the display creative is on entertainment articles where the audience is in scroll-mode, not purchase-mode. Either change creative (more native-like format), block the publisher, or accept as awareness spend.
- Regional sports streaming audio ($480) at 21 days zero-conv = block. Audio is hard to attribute and this audience is wrong; not worth the noise.
- Total potential savings $2,320 but in practice net savings are usually 60, 80% of headline because BidCore reallocates to the next-cheapest inventory which often costs more per click.
- Wasted % rising over time = inventory degrading; BidCore finding more low-quality bundles.
- Wasted % stable at 4, 8% = normal exploration cost.
- Wasted % spiking on a single placement = audience mismatch or click-fraud; investigate.
- High wasted % on in-app placements specifically = the in-app bundle list needs curating; mobile gaming and weather widget bundles are usual suspects.
- Zero wasted spend = you’ve over-allowlisted and missed scaling opportunities.
Sibling cards merchants should reference together
| Card | Why pair it with Wasted Spend |
|---|---|
| StackAdapt Zero-Conversion Spend | The campaign-level twin. This card is publisher/segment-level. |
| StackAdapt Total Spend | Context. Wasted % of total is the meaningful read. |
| StackAdapt Spend by Campaign | If wasted spend concentrates on one campaign, the campaign-targeting needs work. |
| StackAdapt CTR by Campaign | Wasted spend correlates with low CTR (click-fraud bundles) or high CTR with no conversion (audience mismatch on engaged readers). |
| StackAdapt ROAS by Campaign | The campaigns hosting wasted-spend placements show poor ROAS. |
| The Trade Desk Wasted Spend | Same structural pattern on enterprise DSP. Compare bundle overlap; some low-quality in-app bundles hit both DSPs. |
Reconciling against the vendor’s own dashboard
Where to look in StackAdapt: StackAdapt → Reports → Site/App Breakdown for the same window. Filter to placements with zero conversions; spend column should match this card to within sub-percent rounding. StackAdapt does not surface “wasted spend” as a single number; this card derives it. Why our number may legitimately differ from a manual StackAdapt cut:| Reason | Direction | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Time zone | Boundary days off | Account TZ vs UTC. |
| Long-tail conversion | Card slightly high until catchup | A “wasted” placement today may pick up 1, 2 conversions in days 7, 14 (especially CTV). |
| View-through window changes | Direction depends | If you shorten the window, more placements appear “wasted”; if you extend, fewer. |
| In-app vs web definition | None | Both this card and StackAdapt UI use the same publisher/bundle dimension. |
| IVT credit timing | Card slightly high before credits post | IVT spend stays in the wasted total briefly until refunds settle. |
| Card | Expected relationship | What causes legitimate divergence |
|---|---|---|
the_trade_desk.the_wasted_spend | Independent. The two DSPs share much of the same SSP inventory; bundles wasted on one are often wasted on the other. | Different publisher/bundle allowlists between accounts. |
google_analytics.ga_sessions_by_source | GA4 sessions on wasted placements should not show 100% bounce | If GA4 shows healthy engagement, the issue is conversion-tag, not audience quality. |