Each format can be used effectively to achieve certain goals. For example, fullscreen is suitable for coverage campaigns, when the advertiser seeks to consolidate some form of information in the minds of the users. This is a rather annoying format, because it is revealed unexpectedly to the user and it occupies the whole screen. Previously, coverage campaigns were in high demand, but now the majority of advertisers are focused on conversions and post-click KPI, and this type of format became convenient for only some of the business categories. Take pharmaceuticals as an example. Advertisers claim that a certain number of displays, albeit of a not very pleasant advertisement, per user is enough to ensure that an image and association has been imprinted in a person’s head (say, Otrivine means treatment for a runny nose).
Native is much less miss-clickable, as it allows you to include the maximum amount of information about the product in the ad. When it comes to CPI/ CPA campaigns, native is the most obvious format for us. It shows the lowest irritation and has great viewability.
Many underestimate the standard 320×50 banner. This format is popular with media buyers due to its adequate level of miss-clicks and low cost. It is difficult to click on such a small banner accidentally. We understand that the user, at the very least, saw the content in the creative and became interested. Next we can regard this audience as potential buyers/users.
There was a demand for rich-media advertising campaigns recently. This type of banner is a mobile mini-site essentially, which allows you to implement numerous functions (games, geolocation, catalogue, photo and video gallery etc.). It showed very good results in terms of engagement. Russian advertisers do not always understand how to use these opportunity. We develop creatives on our side to make it easier for the client.
I would like to add that audience gathering technologies are more important now in our industry than the choice of advert format. Various combinations of creatives can be used in advertising campaigns if there is a well-formed audience segment. Native ad, fullscreen and video can be shown alternately to the user, as the main thing is to catch his attention at the right moment.
Account Director at PMA Network
From our point of view, the native ads format is the most effective (given the fact that virtually all ads on Facebook and Instagram are native). As for the format inside the native format: video shows the best result, followed by carousel and then static banner. We recommend investing resources in the creation of a high-quality video to all of our clients. Among our clients, there are companiese that abandoned other formats and make videos only.
The main advantage of the native ad format is that it organically fits into the application, doesn’t annoy and engages the user. When combined with proper targeting options, advertising becomes useful.
The main advantage of video advertisements lies in its interactivity- it is more noticeable and interesting to the user. Consumption (not just advertising) shifts from static formats (text posts, images, memes) to the more dynamic ones. It is worth noting that Facebook & Instagram videos auto-play by default.
Concerning the frequency of the use of formats, the distribution is reversed. Above all, it begins with static, then carousel, then video. I associate this with the fact that creating a single picture is the easiest way, despite the fact that it is the least effective. That’s why we invest a lot of efforts in the development of products that make the process of creating a video easier. An example of this type of product- automatic creation of a video for E-Commerce based on information from the product feed (pictures, text, discounts, prices etc.).
Product Director at Aitarget