Results from Innovid’s earlier 2015 Benchmarks magnified the contrast between passive video and interactive video content. Their new mid-year Benchmarks continue this narrative, says Scott Clark, VP, head of brand partnerships at Innovid (pictured left), but it also highlight the varied success rates among different publisher types, media placements and devices, and offer benchmarks for different desired campaign outcomes, such as click thrus vs. time earned. Among the findings:
What success rates should the industry expect for different desired campaign outcomes and ad lengths?
Click-Thru Rates: When an interactive unit is designed specifically with CTR in mind, click-thru rates jump by 81% over static pre-roll video.
Awareness: Awareness levels rise by 51% when using interactive video vs. pre-roll.
Engagement: Engagement rates improve by 7% with 30-second vs. 15-second spot.
Activity: Overall, custom interactive campaigns generated 5.6 times more user activity than standard pre-roll campaigns.
Time Earned: Interactive ads should extend time with a user an average of 45 seconds, compared to 0 seconds with Pre-roll ads, which can’t achieve this. (That’s more than an entire second ad.)
Is pre-roll a thing of the past? No, but contrary to popular belief, deciding which video type is best isn’t merely a question of audience; it’s a question of device, publisher, media buy, and platform.