- Joined
- Sep 7, 2018
- Messages
- 196
If our previously shared US case study (2.4× on social-heavy traffic) felt like an outlier, here's a second data point — completely different geo, traffic profile, and starting RPM.
PUBLISHER PROFILE
STARTING POINT
Strong site content, stable traffic, baseline net RPM $1.99. Inventory was under-monetized — narrow ad stack, low format diversification. Typical pattern for EU content sites without dedicated monetization engineering.
WHAT THE ROLLOUT INCLUDED
RESULT
FORMAT-LEVEL REVENUE DISTRIBUTION
Google (via MCM) — 59% of revenue:
MGID native — 41% of revenue:
ANALYTICAL READ
The
PUBLISHER PROFILE
- Geo: Germany
- Vertical: General content site, mid-range daily volume
- Traffic profile: stable
- MGID One activation: early November 2025
STARTING POINT
Strong site content, stable traffic, baseline net RPM $1.99. Inventory was under-monetized — narrow ad stack, low format diversification. Typical pattern for EU content sites without dedicated monetization engineering.
WHAT THE ROLLOUT INCLUDED
- Diverse high-performing format set: native, rewarded, interstitial, vignette, sticky, swipe-up
- AI-driven layout optimization balancing UX and yield
- MGID and Google demand managed in one dashboard
- Fast setup with zero CWV disruption
RESULT
- Net RPM: $5.16 (2.6× baseline)
- Revenue scaled within days post-launch
- Pageviews actually dropped during the measurement window — RPM growth is pure monetization efficiency, not traffic-driven
- CWV scores held throughout
FORMAT-LEVEL REVENUE DISTRIBUTION
Google (via MCM) — 59% of revenue:
- Rewarded ads: 19%
- Interstitial: 19%
- Sticky banner: 13%
- In-article display: 5%
- Vignette: 3%
MGID native — 41% of revenue:
- Smart widget: 21%
- Swipe-up: 8%
- MGID Story: 7%
- In-article: 5%
ANALYTICAL READ
The


