Image courtesy of Apple & Samsung

With over 27.4 million iPhone 5s sold in the last quarter of 2012 alone, the iPhone 5 is the world’s best-selling smartphone according to a recent report by Strategy Analytics, with its sales figures far outstripping those of previous iPhone models.

The Samsung Galaxy S3, though it lags behind the iPhone in sales, put in a very strong performance during 2012 – it was the best-selling smartphone worldwide until early this year when the iPhone 5 eclipsed it.

But, sales figures aren’t the only important numbers marketers need to consider when contemplating an online campaign. The share of mobile Web usage generated by these devices, and the behavior of those users, are also important metrics.

In North America, where the advertising market is largest, the Chitika online advertising network looked into the Web usage share between the iPhone 5 and the Galaxy S3.

That study found, despite the much heavier worldwide sales of the iPhone 5 in the U.S. and Canadian market, the Galaxy S III shows comparable usage levels to the iPhone 5. The traffic generated by the two phones had a near 50/50 split – a very slight lead was held by the iPhone 5, but the difference was minor.

With both these phones being such heavy hitters in the mobile world, understanding user engagement with advertisements on both these models can help marketers optimize their online campaigns and advertising efforts.

To provide insight into this dynamic, Chitika conducted a study into user engagement with ads on both the Galaxy S III and the iPhone 5, looking to see how each of these popular phones’ users diverged when it comes to online ad-related behavior.

iPhone 5 Vs. Galaxy S3

For the purposes of this study, Chitika examined a sample of tens of millions of online ad impressions collected from the Chitika advertising network. The sample used in this study was taken across the week of May 18th to May 24th, 2013. A user agent analysis was then used to isolate impressions generated by the Galaxy S3 and the iPhone 5.

The click-through rate (CTR) for both these phones is one of many metrics used to gauge the difference in how users of both these devices engage with content on the Web. Targeting demographics with higher CTR can be crucial to driving interaction within a campaign.

Based on the above graph, users on the Galaxy S3 exhibited a value of 0.87 on the CTR Index. The iPhone 5, by comparison, had value of 1 on the CTR index. This means that users on a Galaxy S3 are 87% as likely to click on an ad as a user on an iPhone 5. The iPhone 5 users were engaging with ads a full 15% more often than users of the Galaxy S3.

Given the impact of both these phones in the mobile market, it is important for marketers and publishers alike to have a comprehensive picture of performance when engaging in online campaigns.

Both these phones have overwhelmingly high sales figures. Both have comparably high usage, driving large amounts of traffic across the North American market. These metrics make both of them quite appealing advertising targets for marketers.

The higher performance of advertisements on the iPhone 5, combined with its higher market share overall, makes it a more promising target for marketers looking to gain exposure to their mobile audience.

Studies like this can help advertisers form a good idea of the right angles to take when targeting their online campaigns. Targeting not just the largest markets but also the most engaged markets can help improve advertising performance and allow marketers to achieve the highest ROI on their mobile marketing campaigns.

However, when it comes to local advertising, not all locations are created equal. The value of locally targeted ads depends heavily on who is searching for what — and where.

Frequency & Efficacy Of Local Ads

To gauge the value of locally targeted advertisements in different markets, Chitika Insights conducted a research study into the frequency and efficacy of local ads. Using a sample of hundreds of millions of ad impressions over the course of a week, we studied the prevalence of local ads.

We looked at which metro areas had the highest rates of local Web traffic, taking into account population. Additionally, we looked not just at the frequency of local advertising but at its performance, evaluating cities based on the click-through rate (CTR) of their local ads to gauge which metro areas had the highest interest in local advertising.

Taking a sample of impressions from the Chitika advertising network over the week of May 5, 2013, we first took a ratio of local impressions to impressions overall, to figure out the share of local impressions for various cities. This study looked at which metro areas – out of the top thousand cities in the United States by population – had the highest share of local traffic, subsequently analyzing the top fifty cities in the US by prevalence of local advertisements.

Though we were initially expecting a correlation between the size of a city and its inclusion in our list of top cities for locally targeted advertisements, what we found was quite different.

The top twenty-five cities on the list were a scattered mix of locales and exhibited a wide range of local search share. The city on the list with the highest share of local advertisements, Federal Way, WA (near Seattle and Redmond, WA), held a significant lead in terms of local share — a full 55.60% of its traffic came from local advertising.

The drop-off after that was steep. Texas claimed the next three cities; El Paso, Dallas and Houston comprised three out of the top five cities for local traffic, with a respective 38.77%, 34.28%, and 32.30% local share.

After the steep initial drop-off in local share from the top cities, the decline in local share was slow. Sixty-six percent (66%) of these cities hovered between 20-30% local traffic, with a tail down into the 10% range at the lower edge of the set.

When analyzing data of this sort, there can be little to tell us why these patterns emerge notwithstanding external data sources. Where local traffic seems to congregate is a strange mix of locales.

The cities that led the way in high search shares did not follow a clearly definable pattern when it came to their size. Despite initial expectations, a larger population size showed no significant correlation with a higher share of local search traffic – indeed, many of the cities high on the list had smaller populations, while cities like New York (#47) and Chicago (#34) were further down in the top fifty.

While these numbers tell us something about who is viewing local traffic, they tell little about the actual performance of that traffic. A city may have a high frequency of local traffic, but if the users are not engaging with the advertisements, it may not serve as an effective placement.

Investing In Local Campaigns

In an effort to gauge how well local ads perform, we also looked at the CTR for local advertising in various cities. Here, too, we found similar results: not only did our data set show no significant correlation between city population and CTR, but there was no significant correlation found between the share of local traffic and a city’s local CTR.

For advertisers seeking to increase their local traffic, focusing on markets with a strong proportion of local traffic can be a sensible move. Balancing the amount with the quality of traffic can maximize the ROI of advertising and marketing efforts.

In this, a judicious evaluation of many metrics – the size of a city, its culture, city environment, the likelihood that its internet users will be performing local searches, the CTR and overall performance of the local advertisements that do get shown – are crucial to having a comprehensive picture of the value of advertising locally.

Advertisers and marketers would do well to incorporate multiple data sources and values into their evaluation process before making the decision to invest in local campaigns.

Given the commercialization surrounding the winter holiday season, this is generally a very tempting time for advertisers. With so much consumer interest in procuring the perfect holiday gift, it is little wonder that the season drums up a lot of advertising interest.

But, what of other holidays sprinkled throughout the year? Many of them also have commercial aspects that could be a marketing draw: costumes for Halloween, chocolate and flowers for Valentine’s Day, and travel — for many holidays — to bring people together to celebrate. But, are marketers currently capitalizing on these opportunities?

Optimal Times For Ad Campaigns

Examining key performance indicators around the holidays can provide marketers and advertisers with insight about the optimal times to focus your ad campaigns. With the Easter holiday so recently past, I took the opportunity to examine whether the type of holiday in question has an impact on KPIs.

Easter may not be the biggest or most hyped of holidays, but the plethora of pastel and candy sales surrounding it indicate that it is still a time when many people celebrate — and make purchases.

To quantify this, Chitika Insights took a look at the days leading up to and immediately following the March 31 holiday, from March 14 to April 1. Specifically, this study analysed Thursday through Monday of each week, looking at samples of tens of millions of online ad impressions across the Chitika Advertising Network.

Easter Holiday CTR Trend

The data used in this study is plotted as an index where the highest value of a day’s CTR is set at “1,” and all other values are plotted as percentages thereof. See the graph below for details.

Interestingly, the Easter period showed no significant change in user CTR compared to prior weeks. CTR does change by day of the week (and tends to be higher on weekends, typically); however, the shape of the trend for Easter week does not appear to be very different than the shape of the trend observed in prior weeks — implying that Easter did not greatly impact user CTR.

In comparison to other holidays, Easter has relatively little marketing surrounding it that would merit strong advertiser focus. There is commercialization of Easter, to be sure, but its main thrust of chocolates and candy is fairly low-end — the type of goods that can easily be obtained at any grocery or drugstore.

Holiday Trends Help Focus Your Advertising Efforts

In contrast, holidays like Christmas and Valentine’s Day have relatively high-end goods associated with them: more expensive presents, luxury chocolates, jewelry, etc. Easter, on the other hand, is not marketed as a holiday where luxury goods are a traditional or necessary part of the celebration; and as such, people have fewer online shopping needs associated with the holiday.

Keeping holiday trends in mind can help marketers decide where to focus their efforts. Given the relatively low commercialization around holidays like Easter, there may not be much incentive for marketers to target them.

Even so, worthwhile opportunities may still exist in certain verticals, such as travel deals to bring family and friends together for the holidays. Marketers would do well to focus their campaigns and advertising efforts across the entire spectrum of holidays, keeping in mind which ones are most relevant to their industry.

According to a recent report by Kantar Worldpanel ComTech, Apple’s iOS claimed the majority of smartphone OS sales in the U.S. in Q4 2012, standing at 51.2%. Given the popularity of the iPhone and iOS in North America, Chitika Insights conducted a research study analyzing iOS version click through rate (CTR) to help quantify the value of each market segment.

On January 23, 2013, Apple’s Tim Cook reported that the company had sold half a billion of iOS devices since the launch of the iPhone. A market of this size and breadth is composed of many factors, ranging from age of technology and software to the demographics of the consumers. This column will tell you why, for the iOS operating system, “old is gold.”

We found that users on older iOS versions on average exhibit higher CTR and ROI. Marketers can use this information to target to users with older versions of iOS and increase the effectiveness of their campaigns.

CTR By iOS Version

The data used in this study was drawn from the Chitika Advertising Network between March 1st to March 7th, 2013. This study drew from a sample of tens of millions of online ad impressions originating from iPhones, iPads, and iPods. A user agent analysis was then used to identify the iOS version in use for each iOS device impression in the data set. A graph depicting the CTR of different iOS versions within the aforementioned time period can be seen below:

CTR Related To Age Of OS Version

Based on the data in the corresponding chart, iOS user CTR is directly related to the age of the OS version. In short, the older the iOS version a user is running, the more likely that user is to click on an advertisement, potentially interact with a marketing campaign, or engage in similar actions.

This valuable market segment is further clarified in earlier Chitika Insights studies on Mac OS X and Windows CTR, along with monitor screen size, which identified the same relationship.

Both iOS 3 and iOS 4 users exhibit a significantly higher CTR than those on the most recent version of iOS, clicking on ads 89% and 69% more often than the users on iOS 6.1.2, respectively. This difference can help quantify the significant value of a marketer’s audience which relies on older or outdated devices.

Older Apps Get Higher ROI

While it is true that users who run older versions of iOS represent a small portion of your overall audience (a recent Chitika Insights study reports that users on iOS 4 or earlier only make up 3.7% of all iOS users), marketers can do well by focusing their effort where it can be most effective.

For example, a marketer running a CPA campaign could potentially see a higher ROI by ensuring exposure in older apps, or in apps which have flexible OS version requirements. Focusing on these areas can help ensure that a marketer’s campaign covers the entire scope of the market without overlooking any high value, albeit small segments.

Please note that the age of a user’s OS is only one variable among many which marketers should look toward when engaging in campaign optimization. To successfully reach your audience, be prepared to look at a variety of factors, both quantitative and qualitative.

Running a campaign on in-app traffic can be targeted in a very precise fashion, or receive broad exposure to consumers with relatively little discretion. Type of device, time of day, and even demographic factors such as age or gender are only some of the variables which can impact your campaigns effectiveness. By focusing on the factors which can be easily controlled, such as OS version exposure, Marketers can in turn maximize their ROI for relatively little effort.

The current state of the tablet market is starkly different from a year ago. In 2011, the iPad was still the undisputed king of the tablet market, claiming 67% of worldwide tablet sales, according to Gartner.

iPad Market Share

The year-over-year decline in iPad market share is remarkably similar to the development of the smartphone market earlier this decade, when the iPhone, dominant for several years following its 2007 debut, began to struggle competing with the diversity of the Android platform in global markets.

While it had been easy to define the tablet market as the “iPad market” in the past, the most recent statistics point to a steadily increasing percentage of tablet users electing to browse the Web with a competing tablet, particularly in North America.

Android Competitors

The latest Web usage figures coming out of Chitika Insights show a number of Android competitors hot on the iPad’s heels within the continent. The Kindle Fire saw its share of tablet Web usage more than double between December and January. Other Android tablets, such as the Samsung Galaxy, Nook, and Google Nexus tablet lines also did well – all three now account for a combined 6.7% of North American tablet Web usage.

As the tablet market continues to diversify across screen sizes, quality, and price, it will be increasingly important for marketers to establish a presence on both Android and iOS tablet platforms to maximize campaign effectiveness.

The quantifiable differences between Android and iOS user behavior are slipping away. A recent study conducted by Chitika Insights shows the minimal difference between iOS and Android CTR, coming in at 0.92% and 0.86% respectively.

Preferred Computing Platform

Qualitatively, the differences are becoming much smaller, as well. Many popular Android tablets now have capabilities that equal the iPad, making the user experience itself more consistent across differing tablet platforms.

These developments underscore how tablets as a whole are now developing into a preferred computing platform for consumers. Marketers need to carefully examine how to best engage their target audience on these devices or risk missing out on a growing volume of potential interactions and conversions.

With this growth also comes a greater need for strategy. As TV advertisers are well aware, an advertisement’s time slot can have a dramatic impact in terms of how a consumer reacts to that ad. For marketers or advertisers running campaigns online, it can also be extremely useful to know the optimal time periods in which to run their initiatives.

CTR As Function Of Time & Day Of Week

To shed light on this area of user behavior, Chitika Insights conducted a research study comparing user click-through rates (CTR) as a function of the time of day and day of week. The goal of this study was to provide a data-backed answer for marketers looking to identify the days and time periods where users are most likely to interact with ads.

To quantify this study, Chitika Insights took a sample of ad impressions from the Chitika ad network originating from the U.S. and Canada during the entire month of December.

For the first graph, the x-axis on the plot shows the hour of the week. For instance, the x-axis point labeled “Sunday 6AM EST” measures the average CTR for all Sundays at 6AM EST for the month of December.

As a result, this graph shows how the CTR changes for each of the 168 hours that comprise a given week. It is also plotted as an index, where the highest hour’s CTR is assigned a value of 1, and all others are proportions thereof. The second graph shows indexed CTR by day of week (all hours in a day combined).

Optimizing For Time & Day Of Week

The data displayed in the chart below shows that marketers can best capitalize on elevated user CTR on Saturdays and Sundays, when the rate at which users click and browse the Web lies well above weekday levels. User CTR on the weekdays is, on average, 7% – 12% below the CTRs during the weekend, depending on the day.

In addition, if we look at this data with hourly granularity, we can see that CTR tends to peak in the mornings, from 6AM to 1PM. It then declines until midnight, where it stays low until the early morning.

The trade-off is these time periods also see some of the lowest impression volumes of the week. As such, if marketers’ main focus is maxing Click and Action rates, these CTR differences over time can influence the effectiveness of their campaign.

As always, this is simply one factor that influences click likelihood; nonetheless, considering time of day can become an important tool in the marketer’s toolbox for improving campaigns.

This overall growth is driven by an equally impressive increase in mobile usage. In many parts of the world, mobile phones have long been the primary means for people to access the Internet. Now, that’s becoming true in the US, as well.

By Q4 2012, the US saw over 170 million smartphone subscribers, meaning smartphone owners are now the majority. This massive level of market penetration casts ripples across the Web. In November 2012, over a quarter of all Web traffic on the Chitika Advertising Network originated from mobile devices (both smartphones and tablets).

Consumers can now check social networks, watch the latest YouTube video, and even make a purchase – all from their mobile devices.

In a study published in July 2012, Chitika Insights found tablet usage to spike by almost 95% during prime time TV hours. This stat is highly indicative of elevated use of second screen devices. These are some of the larger scale trends that signify the coming change across the traditional online landscape as it becomes increasingly more mobile.

In the face of a shifting online environment – split between diverging mobile platforms – Chitika Insights conducted a research study to isolate click-through-rates (CTR) of the major mobile operating systems.

The data used in this study was drawn from the Chitika Advertising Network from November 24th to November 30th 2012. This sample was composed of tens of millions of mobile impressions from the US and Canada.

If you are an advertiser or marketer doing business online, the following statistics and analysis will help you best capitalize on these developments:

Based on the chart above, we can see that the iOS user base holds the keys to the proverbial mobile kingdom with an average CTR of 0.92%. Compared to the average Android CTR of 0.86%, iOS users click on ads approximately 7% more frequently than Android users.

As growing mobile volume increases the potential impact of mobile traffic on the bottom line, new opportunities emerge for advertisers and marketers to maximize the ROI of their campaigns.

Recent data from the IAB shows that overall mobile advertising spend grew 95% from $636 million during the first half of 2011 to $1.2 billion during the same period in 2012.

With these impressive growth rates, mobile advertising is clearly the way of the future and a method of reaching out to audiences that advertisers and marketers simply cannot afford to ignore.

Windows 8 has been touted as a leading platform for both desktop and mobile devices, and a key pillar in Microsoft’s strategy to revive its ailing OS business, far removed from the glory days of Window XP. Mac OS X Mountain Lion was launched with a similar fanfare, but under far less pressure, as Apple has regularly released upgrades to Mac OS X since its official launch in 2011.

Surely, the release of these two marquee operating systems in the same year marks a historic event. However, this also begs the question: how do users of separate OS versions interact differently with advertisements and marketing campaigns?

To provide a greater understanding into the connection between OS version and user CTR, Chitika Insights analyzed data coming out of the Chitika Ad Network to uncover any potential relationship that might be found.

OS: Microsoft Vs. Apple

The data used in this study was composed of tens of millions of US and Canadian ad impressions across the Chitika Ad Network, across a date range of November 3 to November 9, 2012. Chitika Insights then compared the CTR of desktop users whose computers were running an OS made by either Microsoft or Apple. The results were quite interesting, although far from unexpected, and are displayed for your viewing pleasure below:

The above data show that for both Windows and Mac OS X, user CTR is inversely related to the recency of an OS version. To put it simply, the older the OS, the more likely a user is to click on an advertisement or engage with a marketer’s campaign.

The relationship between OS version and the propensity of a user to click on an ad was found to be strongest among Mac OS X users. The older the version of Mac OS X a user has installed, the more likely they are to engage with an ad or a marketer’s campaign.

Although CTRs increase with version age on both operating systems, the shape of the slope is steepest for Mac users. Windows users exhibit the same trend, but to a lesser degree.

Software Version Impacts Ad Campaigns

This study suggests that the software version of a particular operating system can be used as a proxy for how tech savvy a user really is – similarly to the results found in last month’s study on screen size. Based on this assumption, the software version of an OS can provide insight into an audience’s adeptness of all things high tech.

Marketers would be well advised to hone in on the distribution of software versions, in order to determine the areas which will provide the highest rate of return.

Understanding the distribution of your audience, whether it is on a single website or across an entire campaign, is an essential piece of running an effective campaign. For example, a marketer running a CPC campaign may experience greater levels of success focusing campaign efforts on a site whose user base tends to run older software versions.

As with screen resolution, software version is only one of the many variables marketers should look at when considering different ways to optimize their campaigns. While a user’s software version can provide deep insight into their behavior, there are undoubtedly many other variables which impact user engagement rates.

One aspect of technology which has changed significantly over time, and continues to carry a substantial impact, is the screen resolution of the marketer’s audience. Apple’s new Retina Display and the extensive marketing push surrounding it exemplifies the general trend of larger consumer electronics companies pushing for a high-resolution Web.

Screen resolution is the measurement of how many pixels a computer monitor can display at once. Older monitors display a pixel count in the hundreds of thousands; whereas, newer monitors can claim a pixel count well into the millions. As the number of pixels displayed grows, so does the quality of the images rendered on the monitors of a marketer’s target audience.

An Important Aspect To Consider

While screen resolution is important, the aspect ratio of a monitor also plays a significant role in the visual experience of someone on the Web. The aspect ratio is the proportion between a screen’s width and height, and determines how an image renders on a monitor.

Older, SD monitors use a 4:3 aspect ratio; whereas, newer HD monitors can use a 16:9 aspect ratio. Often, the highest quality image will result from the resolution that best fits the monitor’s aspect ratio. Many computer monitors also offer support for different screen resolutions and aspect ratios.

Who To Focus On?

As high resolution displays continue to proliferate in the digital landscape, marketers are faced with an interesting dilemma: what is the most effective way to run a campaign that will be exposed to the target audience across a wide range of resolutions with varying quality?

To answer this question, a recent study by Chitika Insights compared the level of user engagement (CTR) seen across the most popular aspect ratios on the Web.

The data used in this study is composed of hundreds of millions of impressions from the Chitika Ad Network, across the date range of September 28th, 2012, to October 4th, 2012. The Chitika Ad Network is composed of hundreds of thousands of publishers, enough to ensure a fair and representative sample of the overall Web.

Chitika Insights found that consumers using older monitors displaying a 4:3 aspect ratio were 9% more likely to click on an ad than those using newer 16:9 and 16:10 monitors. This data suggests that the size and resolution of a monitor can be used as a gauge to determine the likelihood of a user to engage with a campaign or advertisement.

Monitor As Proxy

This study has interesting implications when considering the age of a monitor as a proxy for other behavioral tendencies. Aside from a few outliers, it seems reasonable to assume that users of newer monitors are generally more tech savvy. Given this assumption, the type of monitor used by your audience can be a strong indicator for the user’s technological proficiency, regardless of other demographic factors.

One key takeaway from these results is that marketers and advertisers would do well to pay close attention to their high-value market segments. Marketers can support intelligent decision-making by understanding key demographic elements of their desired market segment. For instance, it may be difficult to sway a less tech-savvy user to purchase a high-tech product;  therefore, a marketer’s budget may be better spent elsewhere.

Insight Into Interests

Screen resolution can provide insight into a user’s set of interests. For instance, someone using an older 4:3 monitor (which have not been widely produced for a number of years) would seem to be unlikely to be interested in purchasing a new motherboard for their computer.

Advertisers could use this as an input to choose which websites and platforms they run their campaigns on. Obviously, marketers should use a variety of input variables to optimize campaigns to their target market segments. Screen resolution is just one that is seldom mentioned, but can be a useful indicator for marketers.

It can be tempting for marketers to optimize results for shorter queries and ignore the long tail, but how much traffic is overlooked this way? And how does the quality of that traffic impact its relevance?

Data provided by advertising network Chitika shows the correlation between query length and ad performance, looking at user engagement as well as the volume of traffic on a given site. In the image below, you can see the relationship between query length by character count and raw impression volume:

As might be expected, the data shows that a majority of search engine queries are shorter. Almost 75% of impression share comes from queries shorter than 30 characters. The remaining 25% is comprised of longer queries, with a steep decline in volume the more verbose the queries get.

Even based on these figures alone, ignoring the long tail of longer search queries means you fail to capitalize on 30% of impression volume – not an insignificant number by any stretch.

Longer Queries = Deeper Engagement

Delving a little deeper, though, the data also explores the relationship between search query length and user engagement, looking at the CTR as a function of query length to gauge the performance of these longer queries, as seen below:

Looking at the data, we can see that hits from these longer queries. despite making up a minority of the queries, perform better among users. The CTR on impressions from queries longer than thirty characters is a full 40% more than the CTR from impressions with shorter queries – so, despite being 30% of volume, they have the potential to be a good deal more than 30% of the revenue.

Take Advantage Of Less Competitive Environment

Additionally, these longer queries are likely not as competitive when it comes to keywords, making their potential for revenue higher still. Ads that come in with a potentially higher CTR, but a lower cost, may make sense to target, depending on your vertical. Besides the fact that they cost less, because these queries are less competitive, marketers are less likely to run into a situation where they need to stop and readjust bidding on a campaign because a competitor has outbid for the top slots.

To take advantage of this revenue potential, marketers must look at where these queries are being made. A previous study looked at what search engines were most likely to have the most verbose users, looking at search query verbosity across the largest search engines.

Though there’s a lot of revenue to be found in the long tail, it’s important not to neglect the higher-volume head keywords. However, the combination of higher user engagement, and the lower chance of competitiveness in ad buying, makes the end of the query length spectrum a worthwhile market to consider.