|
|
|
Traffic Discrepancies between IHR Click-thru Reports and
Your Hosted Web Statistics
Sometimes a client finds that their hosted web site server statistics show less
traffic from IHR.com than the IHR.com Click-thru Statistics report. IHR continually tests the accuracy of our click-thru traffic report. We find
that if, for example, we click on a test link 10 times, it does in fact get
recorded as exactly 10 click-thru's, not more and not less.
Why Do Discrepancies Occur?
IHR
has researched these types of discrepancies and found that they can be due to the following
factors:
1. If a user clicks on an IHR.com promotional link two
times, IHR stats record this as two click-thrus, whereas the target
website hosting stats typically record this as one page view. Here's why::
- The IHR stats will count this as two click-thrus
because it is two click-thrus. This is how all Pay Per Click search engines work. For
example, see the the Google page - "Why
do AdWords and Analytics show different figures in my reports?"
NOTE: Search marketing firms 360i and SearchIgnite
reviewed more than 3.9 million users and 5.1 million clicks during the
first quarter of 2006. They found that "Searchers who ultimately made a purchase
clicked an average of 15% more ads than those who didn't complete a
transaction. Really determined searchers—those that clicked a search
marketer's ads ten times—were three times as likely to convert as
those who clicked an ad only once." Conclusion: A user that clicks on a promotional
listing more than once is more likely to purchase a service or product.
- In contrast, the target Web server typically records this as one
page view, because typically, the user's Web browsers cached (i.e. stored)
the web page on the computer after the first click-thru. Then when the
user views the page again, their browser displays the page from their
computer. The browser doesn't go back to the server to get the page,
so the server doesn't know the user has viewed the page two times, so
the server doesn't record the second page view. Also, the user's ISP may cache the page to reduce their Internet
traffic. By doing this, they do not have send another request to the
target server. AOL uses caching extensively.
2. The users web browser did not report the "Referrer" (i.e. an
IHR.com page) to the target
server - Sometimes Web browsers do not report
the "Referrer" (i.e. an IHR.com page) to the target
server (i.e. the IHR clients website server).
The server's log file will then record this as one page view, however it
will not record the Referrer (that is where the click came from). If this occurs
during a click-thru from IHR.com, the client's web statistics will not see this
as a click-thru from IHR.com.The
designandcreate.com web page section called "URLs and Referrer Fields"
refers to the difficulty of getting accurate Referrer information, saying
"Various browsers and proxies do not send this information to the server for
privacy and other reasons.... Furthermore, several browsers provide conflicting
values for the referrer field.... Given these limitations, strong reliance upon
the information in the referrer field may be more problematic than one would
initially expect."
Some products are sold which will remove the Referrer field in order to
protect users' security:
- See for example the
Afterzed.com Lessons page.
- Some firewalls strip out the Referrer information, as described in the The
SEM Content Conundrum. The author says "the referrer is not reported by
all browsers, and it's stripped out by some firewall software"
- Some "pre-fetch" products do not supply full information (e.g. Referrer)
to the server. See
Web Traffic Logs:
An Imperfect Resource for Evaluation.
- Some human-used browsers, in some cases, do not supply Referrer
information. For example, Jakarta Commons-HttpClient/3.0-rc3
3. A proxy or cache server asked for the web page - Sometimes a proxy
or cache server will send request the web page for a user. In this case, the
Referring Page will not get recorded as from IHR.com, but rather it will be
recorded as from the proxy server or cache.
Special Considerations for Websites Using Google Analytics
If you are using Google Analytics (GA) for your web hosting stats, there are
additional reasons for why you may see a discrepancy between your hosting stats
and the IHR reported click-thru stats.
- As discussed above, if a user click-thrus two times from IHR.com, IHR
stats count that as two click-thrus, however, GA counts that as one page view.
- If any of the target pages, where IHR sends traffic, are missing GA
coding, then GA won't count those visits.
- GA uses JavaScript, and 1-3% of users have disabled JavaScript, resulting
in GA not counting those visits.
- Corporate and personal firewalls can prevent Google page tagging from
sending data to its servers, resulting in uncounted visits.
- If a visitor quickly navigates away from the target page, before the GA
page tag collects its data, this visit won’t be counted.
The following Google page explains some of these issues - "Why
do AdWords and Analytics show different figures in my reports?"
Overall, due to Google's “page tagging” technology, GA tends to undercount
page views. IHR wishes there were a simpler way to compare apples to apples
here. On the IHR side, though, we do work hard to ensure that we’ve removed
robot click-thrus, as well as outlier human click-thrus.
Additional Information About These Discrepancies
Which of the Above Reasons Create the Most Discrepancies
IHR has developed research methods to detect when, and how often, the first
two factors above occur:
- The target web page was cached in the user's browser or the user's ISP,
so the hit never got recorded on the IHR client's server: IHR reviews the
occurrences of this because our server can see that the same IP address e.g.
clicked two times on a link. An ISP assigns an IP address to a user. IHR can
review our records to see if or when the same IP address clicks two or more
times
- The Referrer field is empty, so the the IHR client's server never knows
that the hit came from IHR.com: Although the target server doesn't know
that the hit came from IHR.com, IHR is able to see the click-thrus in our
detailed click-thru reports. So we can see how often this happens.
IHR recently did some extensive research to assess the most common reason for
the discrepancy. We found that the missing Referrer field was the most common,
as shown in the following table.
| Client |
Time Period |
Total click-thrus
during period |
Number of duplicate
click-thrus from same IP address * |
Number of click-thrus
where the Referrer field is blank |
| aa |
Aug 2005 |
47 |
4 |
21 |
| ar |
July 2005 |
239 |
13 |
28 |
| ar |
June 2005 |
187 |
7 |
16 |
| ar |
May 2005 |
182 |
14 |
19 |
* NOTE - In many cases, when there are duplicate entries for an IP address it
is very hard to know if it represents the same
user with the same IP address or different users with the same IP address. The
latter situation is caused by some ISPs who dynamically assign IP addresses, so
that e.g. 10 people might use
one IP address over the course of a month.
If you notice any discrepancies that you wish to discuss with IHR, feel free
to contact IHR.
Copyright 1995 - 2009 Internet Health Resources
Contact
IHR | Promote your
infertility services or products
IHR Websites:
Infertility Resources
Infertility Books.com
Infertility Professionals.com
Infertility Websites.com
|
|