TrueVisit vs affiliate trackers
This is the comparison most people get wrong. An affiliate tracker and a traffic verification tool are not alternatives, and running both is the normal setup.
Last updated
They are not alternatives
An affiliate tracker is your source of truth for clicks, conversions, payouts, and cost. It routes traffic, handles offers, and answers what you earned. TrueVisit does none of that and should not replace it.
TrueVisit answers a question the tracker does not: of the traffic that arrived, how much was a person, which zone or sub ID sent the rest, and what evidence supports that verdict when you take it to the network.
What each one is for
| Question | Affiliate tracker | TrueVisit |
|---|---|---|
| How many clicks and conversions did I get | Yes | No |
| What did I spend and earn per campaign | Yes | No |
| How much of that traffic was a real person | Partially, through anti fraud add ons | Yes, as the core product |
| Which zone or sub ID sent the bot traffic | Varies by tracker and plan | Yes |
| Can I show the network evidence for a refund | Rarely | Yes, an evidence CSV per identifier |
| Did an AI crawler read my landing page | No | Yes |
How they fit together
- Keep your tracker as the source of truth for clicks and revenue.
- Put the TrueVisit tag on your landing pages, and pass the same sub ID and zone parameters you already pass to your tracker.
- Read the attribution screen for the sources whose traffic is not real, then block them at the network.
TrueVisit captures the common sub ID, zone, placement, and click ID parameter names automatically, so in most setups this needs no extra tagging work.