Replacing DoubleClick, Google Campaign Manager 360 is a web-based ad management system for advertisers and agencies, used to manage digital campaigns across websites and mobile. This includes features for ad serving, targeting, verification, and reporting.
N/A
StackAdapt
Score 8.9 out of 10
N/A
StackAdapt, headquartered in Toronto offers their native advertising specialized DSP, supporting programmatic advertising with audience discovery, B2B targeting, and engagement analytics among other features.
Skae is better at multiple platforms because it isn't owned by Google and has more flexibility and resources to bring in other publishers and channels.
Google Marketing Platform had greater reach, was easily added to our other Google platforms and had a great support system. Our staff was more familiar with the platform as it has similarities to other Google products, hence it was easier to use. Whilst the other platforms had …
Adform has the worst support service I have ever encountered. I had to wait days for an answer, and would usually just be given a link to their support documentation which didn't provide the answer I needed. The interface is extremely confusing, and requires far too many …
We opted for DoubleClick because we use other Google products, so we wanted a platform that was relatively seamless to integrate with our current advertising.
I've used Sizmek as an alternative and the UI/UX was extremely dated and slow. Updating creative isn't intuitive and requires learning the system so that you can do basic things like update jpgs correctly.
We use all Google solutions, but we've tried to use other solutions to display ads, manage, and optimize our services. Google offers a complete suite of solutions and great and smooth integration.
JWPlayer is great to upload videos and pulling video-metrics. We can easily copy a link to connect JWPlayer videos into Google Marketing Platform but you cannot solely use JW to run ads—just our videos and separate video reporting.
I prefer Google Marketing Platform. Clients see the value in a Google branded platform, and it integrates well with most of our other platforms, dashboards, etc.
DoubleClick is slightly better to manage, especially in the sense of its user interface, which isn't super easy to navigate, but compared to Marin, is a lot easier. It also has a much easier process in terms of uploading ads to engines such as AdWords and Bing. I also find it …
Having gone through a trial of Kenshoo in a previous role. The interface seemed less responsive, there was less coordination with releases by Google/Microsoft and there wasn't a financial benefit to swapping. We decided to stay with DoubleClick.
I believe that DoubeClick is the best third-party ad server that I've used in the trafficking space. Although I did have a few years of experience using Flashtalking and Atlas, I'd prefer DCM. In my opinion the custom conversion and attribution models in DCM allow you to …
Marin takes a lot more time for everything, mainly for the campaigns setup. This also leads to many mistakes, which impact the performance. I've used Marin on a couple of previous clients and we've had many problems with it, mainly with correct conversion tracking and account …
DoubleClick is the best tool to use for data management since it is fast, easy to use and provides everything needed for optimizing towards better performance.
DoubleClick has been a great alternative to other DSPs because of the easy integration between the adserver and the DSP. It really cuts the work in half.
DoubleClick allows to compile Google Adwords data with Bing data and allows for more bulk changes that on Adwords would be only possible via Adwords editor
DoubleClick is definitely more efficient than Kenshoo, particularly when it comes to reporting. It's great to be able to pull YoY data quickly, whereas Kenshoo only allows three month increments on most levels and monthly increments at the keyword level.
I feel that both MediaMath and TradeDesk, while not as pretty or user intuitive as DoubleClick just out perform Bid Manager in terms of performance, driving low CPA's and overall better support.
In the past we have tested Marin and Adobe AdLens for automated keyword bidding. Both have not worked well for our business as lead generation comes with a lot of challenges (i.e. verification process, daily and monthly lead caps etc.). AdLens recommends to add as many keywords …
I wasn't involved in the selection process however, but I was happy with the functionality because I had to update promotional ad copy on a daily basis.
With Google Ads you are able to set your budget and work within it. However, it is pay per click so the price does increase substantially. StackAdapt seems more budget friendly.
StackAdapt has an easier self-serve platform than JamLoop, where you can also buy programmatic CTV and display banners. Though they lack audio placements, which is another cross-channel tactic in StackAdapt to reach the same audience with multiple formats. Comparable CPM rates …
We have evaluated Criteo because we have many eCommerce clients. But we decided against it because StackAdapt seems to have much better and complete targeting options and ways to optimize campaigns post-launch, whereas Criteo feels more like a "spray & pray" approach. …
We selected StackAdapt because we thought they would provide us with a greater ROI for our prospecting campaigns and retargeting campaigns. Unfortunately, we had a problem with the prospecting campaigns which was that we had a very huge audience segment to target so it does not …
StackAdapt is significantly less expensive than the Trade Desk. StackAdapt doesn't have campaign minimums, unlike the Trade Desk, meaning you can experiment with a lower ad spend to gain client confidence before investing at a larger level. Plus they don't lock you into an …
Even though we find the StackAdapt UI clunky and not intuitive, it's a huge step up from the Basis UI. We previously used Basis and ran all the media ourselves, and there were spend thresholds we had to hit with Basis that often made it a constraining platform to use. …
Much better in terms of audience definition and campaign control. We found AdRoll to be relatively easy to use, but light in terms of campaign parameters, whereas StackAdapt is also easy to use but allows us to be completely in the driver's seat.
I couldn't find Teads in the dropdown, but that's what I'd most compare StackAdapt too. Both generated strong results for our various clients and campaigns run on the platforms, but overall, I've been far more impressed with StackAdapt. Not only is StackAdapt's dashboard …
Basis is great for display ads. StackAdapt, however, is in a completely different world when it comes to NAtie ADvertising. Typical DSPs like Basis do not come close to comparing.
In terms of Native advertising, StackAdapt blows Outbrain and Taboola out of the water. The ability to drive impressions is similar between all three, but we have seen a large improvement in the quality of these impressions from StackAdapt. Clicks, engagement, and sales are all …
StackAdapt's video capabilities perform in-line with what we have seen from Sharethrough, but without any minimums attached to their campaigns. As far as Nativo, their traffic was lower, but the quality of those sessions was better. As far as re-targeting capabilities, we have …
StackAdapt has better support, better integration, is easier to work with, and listens to customers. Other platforms serve up a take-it-or-leave-it attitude to all but the largest customers.
I feel pretty neutral about Google Marketing Platform. For the longest time, my company wasn't using it because each of the features (Data Studio, Analytics, etc.) could be accessed separately. In fact, most of the time, I don't even go into Google Marketing Platform because it's easier to directly navigate to the individual platforms. There are very few features about GMP that can only be accessed from the GMP UI. The Integrations Center is probably the main feature I utilize from the GMP UI, which allows me to see a summary of the integrations I have in place across all my client properties and accounts.
Campaigns for Brand Awareness: StackAdapt works effectively in campaigns for brand awareness where expanding brand visibility and reaching a large audience are the main objectives. Advertisers can target particular demographics, hobbies, and behaviors with its sophisticated targeting features, making sure that the correct audience groups receive brand messaging.
Setting up tracking URLs is very easy and it also helps us identify if any errors have occurred with it. This allows us track all types of conversions to the most granular level.
Accessing all accounts from Double Click significantly reduces the hours we spend on reporting. Any level of detail could be easily pulled out from the reporting tab.
A very big strength of Double Click is that it's integrated with other publishers, too, besides AdWords.
Communication: Their reps are incredibly transparent, thorough and detailed. I really, really appreciate that.
Creativity: Not only are the reps communicative, they actually bring new, fresh ideas to the table. As busy as we are, I can't thank them enough for that.
Easy-to-use: As detailed as the dashboard is, it's actually pretty easy to use and bring new users up-to-speed on.
The process for on-boarding new users can be difficult if they do not already have a Gmail or Gmail-linked account.
Difficult to troubleshoot technical issues (with the platform, with tags, etc.) because of the lack of customer support. Unclear if the agency has a dedicated team or individual to assist, and often have to deal with out-sourced support teams.
There has been occasional slopping maintenance of the campaigns, and we have to follow up with questions about spending spikes or significant changes in delivery CPMs.
Account rep knowledge can sometimes be lacking. When we question our reps about performance, we sometimes get confusing or nonsensical answers.
The reporting UI is definitely clunky and unintuitive.
Due to its adapting behavior with industry ad formats and seamless integration with publishers and DSP's, I don't see myself moving away from DCM. As we see the display advertising is getting more programatic and automated due to the rise of DSP and concept of RTB, Double Click has evolved with new advanced best practices
The platform is easy to use and understand whether it is being used as self-serve or a managed service. The audience targeting is solid, and array of placements is versatile. With these, the level of engagement for video content is usually great
The Doubleclick interface is easy and simple to get a hang of. The options are slightly limited compared to other DSPs. But, for a simple campaign, this is a great DSP to move forward with. They have a ton of data and can plug into a lot of different partners
It is very user friendly and if any team members need further help, we are able to easily access their customer service team for hands on assistance with an actual human being, not a robot. Their team has been incredibly kind, understanding and thorough. It is really a great all in one tool for a business who relies greatly on advertising campaigns.
They do not have strong support team. It is tough to get answer when I need it. They always refer you to an online guide and not an actual person. If so, the person is based out of an offshore team in India and does not know the specific client goals .
Support has been exceptional. Our dedicated team is always available and ready to answer any questions that may arise. We receive updates from them on a regular basis and they go above and beyond providing assistance when needed. The team is absolutely one of the bright spots in our relationship with StackAdapt
DoubleClick is slightly better to manage, especially in the sense of its user interface, which isn't super easy to navigate, but compared to Marin, is a lot easier. It also has a much easier process in terms of uploading ads to engines such as AdWords and Bing. I also find it easier to investigate the attribution tools in DoubleClick compared to Marin.
StackAdapt has an easier self-serve platform than JamLoop, where you can also buy programmatic CTV and display banners. Though they lack audio placements, which is another cross-channel tactic in StackAdapt to reach the same audience with multiple formats. Comparable CPM rates on CTV, and customer support on both is similarly strong.
DS3 has improved ROI considerably due to its ability to make the work of a team of digital marketers to go further and improving internal efficiency.
There is a notable improvement in account performance for those integrated with DoubleClick as opposed to not, with better tracking, new bid strategy options, and a more responsive interface.
The additional fee on top of media spend is a considerable expense for a large advertiser, but the necessity of a product/solution such as this means that there is always likely to be some comparative cost.