Performance reporting

Understand performance from click to approved conversion.

Role-scoped dashboards show each account its own campaigns, traffic and financial outcomes.

Open dashboard Talk to us

Clicks and conversions

Publisher breakdown

Traffic sources

Fraud decisions

Wallet and earnings

MMP health

Advertisers

Track campaign status, conversion rate, publisher contribution and budget.

Publishers

Review clicks, installs, approval quality, earnings and link metadata.

Operations

Authorized admins review tasks, risk, payouts and integration failures.

Read campaign reporting as a connected set of records

Begin with the question the report should answer

Analytics becomes more useful when the reader knows which decision is being made. An advertiser may want to compare approved results with spend, while a publisher may want to understand which links contributed to reviewed earnings. Those are related questions, but they are not the same report. ADJODO's dashboards scope information to the relevant account role and campaign relationships.

Start with the campaign, time period and outcome you intend to examine. A screenshot of an overall number does not explain those boundaries by itself. Keep the selected context alongside any figure copied into a review note. This page explains how to approach the available records without treating every visible count as a universal statement about all traffic or every account on the platform.

Distinguish activity from accepted financial outcomes

Clicks, reported events, reviewed conversions and processed amounts represent different stages in a campaign workflow. A raw event can require attribution and review before it belongs in an accepted-outcome total. Read the status and scope of each figure rather than comparing numbers only because both appear on a dashboard. Repeated callback delivery should not be mistaken for several different conversions when the event identity is the same.

If two records disagree, establish that they describe the same period, campaign and definition before deciding which one is wrong. Keep an event or request reference where authorized support needs to investigate a specific case. That reference is more useful than a broad statement that a total looks low without identifying what the expected number actually measures.

Compare sources under a consistent campaign setup

A source-level review can show how publisher contributions differ within the declared distribution. Compare the available outcomes alongside the links, eligibility and review status relevant to each source. Avoid grouping a newly changed campaign with an earlier configuration as though it were one unchanged test. Record edits to targeting, budget or tracking so the comparison has a clear boundary.

A high click count alone does not establish that a source fulfilled the intended action, and a small accepted count may need context about the campaign's exposure and cap. Use the report to locate a question that can be investigated through evidence. Clear source comparisons are strongest when their labels, time periods and event definitions remain consistent from the raw records to the summary being discussed.

Turn an observation into a traceable follow-up

When a report suggests a problem, state the campaign, period, affected metric and the evidence needed for the next check. A missing callback calls for an integration review, while a confusing destination can require a browser test. Keep those tasks separate so a change in one layer does not conceal a failure in another. Authorized administrators may have additional operational views, but those permissions do not make a private account's information appropriate for a public screenshot.

Share only the details required for the investigation. Analytics does not guarantee future performance or replace review of the underlying offer. Its value is to make a current outcome understandable enough that the next campaign decision has a documented reason and can be evaluated against the subsequent records.