YouTube views are 18-25% less effective than audio downloads at driving purchases and may not be interchangeable despite common industry belief and practice.
This is the key takeaway from a new report entitled “Re-Thinking YouTube: Why Your Video Podcast Ads Are Converting 25% Worse Than Audio,” developed by Oxford Road and Podscribe.
The report attempts to measure the relative strengths and weaknesses of “pure audio” vs YouTube simulcast podcasts and evaluates two independent data sets, both of which suggest that simulcast impressions are less valuable to performance marketers than audio.
It suggests there may be a loss of up to $250k in conversion value for every $1m spent on YouTube podcast impressions.
Despite the acknowledgement of the shift to video in podcasting, unlocking new audiences for creators and opportunities to drive scale for marketers, the report highlights that 50% of respondents said limitations in their performance data were a blocker to growing investment in podcasting. There was specific emphasis on YouTube for this lack of confidence.
The measurement problem
The report notes that the pixel-measurement approach typically used to measure ad downloads on podcasts is not applicable to YouTube, as pixels are not supported.
Instead, advertisers typically use promo codes or post-purchase surveys; however, the report underlines that these often suffer from small sample sizes, fail to represent the full impact of the ads, and don’t distinguish well between audio and YouTube’s individual impact.
As a result, marketers using pixels often treat podcast impressions as fungible across platforms, assuming the same level of effectiveness in video as they see in audio.
The report states: “The assumption that video impressions perform at the same rate as audio is perhaps the best one the industry has, but its limitations are obvious.”
Assessing 1,000+ campaigns across 100+ brands, Oxford Road and Podscribe analysed two datasets: one containing performance information measured by promo codes and the other by “How-Did-You-Hear-About-Us?” (HDYHAU) surveys.
Within each dataset, impressions delivered via audio (RSS) and YouTube were included.
Both reached the same conclusion that a YouTube exposure does not work as hard per “impression” as an audio-only podcast exposure at driving advertiser outcomes.
Therefore, an RSS impression may not be interchangeable with a YouTube view, contrary to standard industry practice.
Different behaviours lead to different outcomes
The report points out how there are different listening/viewing behaviours between podcast listening, which is an intentional lean-in activity, and YouTube viewing, which can be more passive.
YouTube is often driven by its discovery algorithm, suggesting faster viewer loss.
Podcast listeners, alternatively, typically repeat episodes and return based on established trust in the host.
Additionally, long-term podcast listeners have been conditioned to respond using promo codes for many years. This expectation doesn’t exist in the same way in the YouTube environment.
The report also highlights that YouTube audiences are often more international, leading to less relevant ads and a lower impact.
The view count with YouTube is also different to a podcast download, which can only be counted once per 24 hours per piece of content, whereas a YouTube view can be counted multiple times in a day.
“It is conceivable that view counts might exceed downloads for the same amount of consumption,” the report outlines.
Protecting ROI
The report recommends several actions to protect ROI.
It highlights segmenting measurement by platform and not treating RSS downloads and YouTube views as fungible, but rather to track and report on “impression” sources separately and to treat them differently in modelling.
It states: “Consider reducing pixel weights for video if you’re assuming 1:1 performance.”
The report also suggests standardising surveys and tagging specifically for YouTube.
Regarding media and strategy pricing, it is recommended to price simulcasts deliberately and to calibrate YouTube CPMs to reflect the per-impression performance gap.
The report cautions that more analysis is required and that different types of YouTube podcast ads work differently; for instance, ads with a true video component, such as product visuals, may require more nuanced analysis to assess their comparative effectiveness with audio ads.
However, leveraging videos’ strength to boost impression value through product shows or unboxings was encouraged.
The report cited simulcasts’ strength in bringing scale, reaching new audiences and offering supplemental exposure as well as the ability to bring in different kinds of product messaging; however, it reiterated that video content should not be assumed to be better, outlining a need to be aware of biases in media planning.
Adwanted UK are the audio experts operating at the centre of audio trading, distribution and analytic processing. Contact us for
more information on J-ET, Audiotrack or our RAJAR data engine. To access our audio industry directory, visit
audioscape.info and to find your new job in audio visit
The Media Leader Jobs, a dedicated marketplace for media, advertising and adtech roles.
