RevContent vs Content.ad- Choosing the Native Ad Network

We live in the world of the Internet and it is getting monetized differently each day, as more businesses have created their online presence recently, online ad industry is not only booming but new innovation is rapid. Brands have recognized the fact that, in order to grow, they need to advertise across different channels and as it seems native advertising is becoming a big piece of pie. In today’s post, we are going to compare the two native advertising giants, namely Taboola and RevContent.

vs (2)

RevContent vs Content.ad: The Journey So Far

Revcontent is one of the most sought after native ad networks in the online ecosystem, serving some of the important names in the publishing arena such as NBC news, Forbes, CBS and so on. In a span of two years it has went all the way to compete with Taboola and Outbrain, taking a pie of their market share.

Content.ad was the first company to offer a successful content marketing service to its online advertisers and has strong roots in direct marketing. It is one of the largest native sponsored content networks in the world that helps advertisers channelize their business costs on creative ad placements so as to realize a positive return on investments.

Minimum Traffic Requirement : RevContent vs Content.ad 

The story with RevContent might be of rejections. It is not an easy task to engage with Revcontent and the company rejects 98% of the applications on an average. They don’t compromise on the quality of the websites and work only with publishers who have the potential to reach the premium level. They typically won’t accept applications unless you have 3 million page views a month.

It is relatively easier to get accepted via Content.ad. They don’t have a very rigorous approval process. However, having said that, they do consider the website’s niche during the approval process, not all sites will be approved. Content.ad approve only those sites which they think will be relevant to their advertisers and they might reject those sites for which they might not have relevant advertisers.

RevConetent Revenue Share vs Content.ad Revenue Share

Content.ad provides 60% of all gross revenue actually received by Content.ad to the publishers.  However, RevContent only takes 20% of the revenue share. That means the publishers get 80% of what the advertiser is willing to pay for a click. This indeed has resulted in a tremendous acknowledge from the publisher community for this native ad network. It seems, RevContent wins the publisher’s heart here.

Ad Quality: RevContent vs Content.ad 

Both Content.ad and RevContent doesn’t have strict editorial in terms of the type of ad creatives which are uploaded. Quite a lot of their ads are product based. This is something different from what Taboola and Outbrain offers, infact Outbrain ad quality is much better. However, over the last few months, RevContent has upgraded the quality of their ads and the look and feel of the ads are much better, and in fact they don’t look spammy these days. Well, its still difficult to tell from an advertiser’s point of view, which network can get you more clicks and better return on investment.

RevContent CPM/RPM rates  vs Content.ad CPM/RPM rates

 

I managed to asked one of my friend about his experience with RevContent. Average RPM is between $0.5 to $5. Upon discussing with him, he informed that the RPM used to be almost 2-3 times more than what it is currently now. Infact, they have tested Taboola, Content.ads and Revcontent and found RevContent to be better in terms of revenue generation. A lot of publishers accepted that their RevContent earnings are in fact higher than adsense.

I haven’t personally used content.ad but after reading the forum messages, I saw they offer a CPC of 2-3 cents. You get better rates if you have traffic from tier one countries. I will try using content.ad and let you know the average CPC rate I am getting with them.

Revenue Report: RevContenet vs Content.ad

Here is the revenue report of Content.ad, I found this report from one of the site hosted for sale on Flippa.com. The CPC is comparatively high and maybe because majority of the traffic was coming from tier one countries.

9260d1f8-08cd-48bf-b148-5e30e4ee7e92

Here is the revenue report of RevContent. The RPM is a bit low due to season variation. Publishers have reported better RPMs with RevContent.

Revcontent earnings report

Revcontent earnings report of RevContent

Our Verdict

After analyzing all the points, I would say, since monetization is a big factor from a publisher’s point of view, one would be more inclined towards RevContent than Content.ad since the former pay much better rates. For quite a number of publishers, RevContent earnings have outperformed their AdSense earnings as well! All the best, and try RevContent! Share you views on RevContent vs Content.ad!

Recommended

Adnow- Native Ad Network

Adnow will help you make additional revenue from your existing traffic by simply putting an ad widget anywhere on your content. Suitable for mid sized publishers and bloggers.

Newspaper 7

Newspaper 7 is the most versatile WordPress theme ever created that can help boost your adsense revenue, make your site faster and provide a superior UX experience to users.

59$

Avid traveller, loves listening to people, interested in blogging, digital marketing, AdSense optimization, marketing research and data science. He is the founder of Beamingnotes.com and Myeduz.in, and has also helped 100s of clients with Ad optimization.

2 Comments
  1. Reply
    Praveen October 5, 2016 at 4:50 pm

    Hello Abhishek,

    Valuable information, I am using content ad getting low CPC as like your reports. I am not sure about other locations but in India the same contents are repeated often many months with low cpc. As a result the ctr is also influenced. Is there any better option for small publishers.

    • Reply
      Abhishek Dey October 6, 2016 at 6:48 am

      You can try Spoutable! It will be supplement your revenue in addition to Content.ad

      Thanks,
      Abhishek

Leave a reply