EyEBlASTER BEnCHMARk InSIgHTS - MediaMind

Eyeblaster
Benchmark Insights
Using Dwell to Measure
Advertising Effectiveness
“Tell me, and I will forget. Show me, and I may
remember. Involve me, and I will understand.”
Confucius (551-479 BCE)
retweet this

Making Display Advertising
The Engine for Automotive Growth
Research
Highlights
• Ads with a high Dwell Rate
are more likely to have a high
Conversion Rate.
• A new study by Microsoft,
comScore and Eyeblaster
shows Dwell’s effectiveness.
• High Dwell triples brand related
search, increases traffic by
69%, and increases brand
engagement.
• Placements in which users
spend ample time on the web
page increase Dwell Rate.
• Ads that are more visible over
the publisher’s content have a
higher Dwell Rate.
• Combining video into your
creative increases Dwell Rate
by 29% and nearly doubles
Average Dwell Time.

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Why Engagement Counts
In 1938, American education reformer John Dewey asserted that “there
is an intimate and necessary relation between the processes of actual
experience and education.” 1 According to Dewey, people ‘learn’ through
doing and playing.
In the offline world, the target of advertising is a ‘viewer’ – a passive
bystander that can only direct his eyeballs to the direction of the TV,
newspaper or magazine. Online, the target of advertising is a ‘user’ – an
active participant that can engage, interact and play with an ad.
Engagement is the third dimension of online advertising, beyond the
traditional reach and frequency. While the theory behind the benefits
of interactivity and engagement is clear, Eyeblaster acknowledged the
need for empirical evidence that Dwell does affect brand effectiveness
metrics.
New research provides scientific evidence for the effectiveness of Dwell
as an engagement metric. The research shows that when more people
choose to actively engage with your brand, as measured by a high Dwell
Rate and a high Average Dwell Time, the more the needle shifts in favor
of your brand.
This new research by Eyeblaster, Microsoft Advertising and comScore
concludes that campaigns with high Dwell not only increase brand
engagement, but also drive increased brand related search and increased
site traffic.
An additional analysis by Eyeblaster shows that Dwell has an impact way
beyond branding. Ads with a high Dwell Rate are more likely to have a
high Conversion Rate as compared to ads with a low Dwell Rate.
It would seem that there is more to display advertising than a mere click.
How then, can you increase your campaign’s Dwell? These three simple
steps will help you increase your Dwell and ultimately your ROI:
• First, include placements around editorial content that require thorough
reading.
• Second, combine video into your ad.
• Third, get more assertive and visible with your ads!
1
Dewey, John. Experience and Education. 1938/1997. New York. Simon and Schuster.
3 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Why Dwell?
In the second half of 2008, Eyeblaster released the Dwell
metrics. The aim was to define a ubiquitous online metric
to help advertisers quickly gauge the effectiveness of online
Rich Media campaigns. Dwell was developed to capture Rich
Media’s essence – interactivity and touch.
Dwell is divided into two metrics: Dwell Rate and Average
Dwell Time. Dwell Rate measures the proportion of impressions
that were intentionally engaged with by touch, interaction or
click. Average Dwell Time measures the duration of a Dwell in
seconds for users who engaged. In both cases, unintentional
Dwell lasting less than one second is excluded.
Dwell provides an estimate of the share of impressions that were
seen by users with high likelihood. Users’ natural tendency is
to follow the mouse cursor movement with their eyes. Dwell
measures the proportion of impressions that had a meaningful
mouse-touch, lasting more than one second. While there have
been users who have seen the ads and have not touched
them with their mouse, Dwell allows us to gauge the number
of users that are very likely to have seen the ad, and indeed
take time to explore the brand’s message.
Dwell is superior to older metrics such as Click Through
Rate (CTR) and Interaction Rate. CTR measures the share of
impressions that were clicked on. However, in many cases,
users can retain the message from the ad itself and do not
have any reason to browse to the advertiser’s website by
clicking on the ad. For example, users who have seen an ad
for a shampoo can typically get all of the information that they
need from the ad and are less likely to click on the ad and
browse to the advertiser’s website. In this case, the ad has
done its part – users have seen the ad and got the message.
However, without a click being recorded the ad was deemed
completely ineffective, penalizing a well performing creative by
using an inapplicable metric.
Similarly, interactions measure specific actions taken by the
user such as playing or stopping video, clicking, expanding
and other custom interactions. Alas, auto-initiated video, for
example, can deliver the message without any interaction.
After all, TV has been delivering messages without interactions
for decades. Furthermore, Interaction Rate may be influenced
by the number of interactions defined in the creative – a game
could deliver multiple interactions and playing a video merely
one or two. Thus, when Interaction Rate is creative dependent,
it may prove hard to compare apples to apples, making crosscampaign
benchmarking unfeasible.
“Dwell encompasses the whole
course that users go through when
engaging with ads”.
Dwell was developed to capture the branding effect of campaigns.
To do that, it encompasses the whole course that users go
through when engaging with ads. Rich Media ads need to capture
users’ attention away from the publisher’s content and make
them want to find out more about the brand. As users tend to
follow the mouse cursor movement with their eyes, this is a
proxy to how many users have seen the ad. Therefore, Dwell
Rate measures whether the ad was successful in capturing
users’ attention by quantifying the proportion of users who
physically touched the ad.
After users have seen the ad, advertisers need to draw them to
interact and have a deeper brand experience. It is this deeper,
all encompassing multi-modal experience where the cognitive
change on part of the consumer takes place, combining touch
with the audio-visual senses. 2 The more human senses involved,
the more emotions evoked and ultimately the more time users
spend with the brand, the deeper their overall experience with
the brand is and the more likely they are to recall the brand
message.
Average Dwell Time measures the length of users’ engagement
with ads, to quantify how long users were exposed to the ad.
Average Dwell Time measures how much time the mouse was
on the ad, the panel was expanded, the video playing or any
other action taking place on the ad after the user engaged.
A previous study by Eyeblaster Research has already shown
that today’s consumers are 24x more likely to interact with an
ad than click on it, and those that choose to do so engage
with ads on average for around 43 seconds. 3 But what does
this actually mean for the marketer? While the theory makes
sense that those ads with higher Dwell work better than ads
with lower Dwell, what happens in practice?
2
Lugo, J.E., Doti, R., Wittich, W. & Faubert, J. Multisensory Integration: Central Processing Modifies Peripheral Systems. October 2008. Psychological Science.
3
Eyeblaster Research. Analytics Bulletin: Trends in Time and Attention. Available for download at: http://www.eyeblaster.com/Content.aspx?page=resource&id=74
4 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Dwell and Branding
New research by Eyeblaster, Microsoft Advertising and comScore
shows that Dwell does have an actual effect on brand metrics.
The research investigated the differences between campaigns
with a low active engagement as measured by a low Dwell
and campaigns with a high active engagement as measured
by a high Dwell.
“The robust methodology of the
research ensured any positive brand
uplift observed was due exclusively to
the increase in Dwell.”
The study examined a sample of high Dwell campaigns and a
sample of low Dwell campaigns and compared the difference
between them in terms of their brand effects. The robust
methodology ensured any positive brand uplift observed was
due exclusively to the increase in Dwell.
The sample of campaigns was taken out of 800 Rich Media
campaigns that were served by Eyeblaster exclusively on
Microsoft Advertising sites between January 2009 and June
2009. The 800 campaigns were ranked by total Dwell scores. 4
To ensure a distinct difference between high and low Dwell,
the study analyzed campaigns that fell in the top and bottom
10% of the Dwell scale.
Overall, 10 campaigns from the low Dwell group and 10 campaigns
from the high Dwell group were chosen for the analysis. These
20 were selected for having the largest number of impressions,
ensuring the biggest sample sizes for our analysis of over 6,500
panelists. The campaigns covered eight industry verticals.
Campaigns with high Dwell are 3x
more effective at driving search than
campaigns with a low Dwell.
Uplift between unexposed and exposed was averaged for the
10 low Dwell and 10 high Dwell campaigns. These average
uplifts were compared to evaluate the impact of increased
Dwell on subsequent brand effects.
The results of the study indicate that users who were exposed to
campaigns with a high Dwell are more likely to search for brand
related keywords as compared to users who were exposed
to campaigns with a low Dwell. The research found that users
who were exposed to campaigns with a low Dwell increased
brand related keyword searches by 12%, as compared to the
control group, while users who were exposed to campaigns
with a high Dwell increased brand related keyword search
by 39%, as compared to the control group. This shows that
campaigns with high Dwell are 3x more effective at driving
search than campaigns with a low Dwell.
Furthermore, campaigns with a low Dwell increased advertisers’
site traffic by 10%, as compared to the control group, while
campaigns with a high Dwell increased site traffic by 17%. This
is an incremental change of 69% between campaigns with low
Dwell and campaigns with high Dwell. Campaigns with a high
Dwell also increased brand engagement – increasing page
views and time spent on the brand’s site. 5
For each of the 20 campaigns, comScore identified people
that had been exposed to the ads. comScore measured those
panelists’ subsequent online behavior across a four week period
and compared those to unexposed panelists and their online
behavior. These groups were pair matched – the exposed/
unexposed groups were equal except for the fact that the
exposed group had seen the ads, the unexposed had not.
Groups were matched to ensure equality according to specific
demographic and online behavioral variables.
4
To capture both the effect of Dwell Rate and of Average Dwell Time, the research examined the Total Dwell which was defined as Dwell Rate multiplied by
Average Dwell Time.
5
Available for download at: http://advertising.microsoft.com/europe/dwell-on-branding
5 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Dwell and Conversions
While the research by Eyeblaster, Microsoft Advertising and comScore has shown the advertising effect of Dwell, Eyeblaster
Research has found empirical evidence that Dwell works beyond branding. In fact, there is a link between a higher Dwell Rate
and a higher Conversion Rate.
Dwell Rate and Conversion Rate
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
The chart above describes the link between Dwell Rate and
Conversion Rate. For the purpose of this analysis, Eyeblaster
Research analyzed the results of over 13 thousand ads and
13 billion Rich Media impressions served between Q1 2009
and Q4 2009. Ads were divided into buckets according to
their Dwell Rate, and for each bucket the average Conversion
Rate was calculated.
Interactive ads that attract users
to touch and play with them will
generate interest, and ultimately a
higher Conversion Rate.
The results clearly establish that there is a link between
Dwell Rate and Conversion Rate. On average, a higher Dwell
Rate yields a higher Conversion Rate. Thus, interactive ads
that attract users to touch and play with them will generate
interest, and ultimately a higher Conversion Rate.
Conversion Rate is only one measure to validate Dwell. The
aim of Dwell is not necessarily to generate conversions, but to
measure branding effectiveness. Nevertheless, these results
confirm the effectiveness of Dwell – users who Dwell on ads
and are allured by the creative are more likely to convert.
6 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Increasing your Dwell
How then can you get a higher Dwell for ads? The second half of this research is dedicated to best practices for getting a higher
Dwell Rate and a higher Average Dwell Time.
1. Place ads in environments where users spend ample time on the webpage.
The longer users spend with the publisher’s content, the higher their Dwell Rate. The chart below presents the link between
Ad Duration, the length of time that an ad is presented, and Dwell Rate. The analysis indicates that environments in which
users spend ample time with the publisher’s content or with the ad exposed, tend to have a higher Dwell Rate.
The Impact of Ad Duration on Dwell Rate
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
7 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Consider Instant Messaging. Users tend to spend about
eight minutes with the ads presented. True, during some of
that time the messenger window is covered by the browser
or other programs. Nevertheless, when users are actively
chatting, they are exposed to the ads for a long duration.
Imagine the average chat session: You type “Hi”, you wait…
wait… wait… Your friend is typing… typing… and then
“Hi” pops up. You type “what’s up?” You wait… wait…
and while you stare at the messenger window waiting for
a reply, you notice the flashing banner of a new movie that
just came out.
As you have nothing better to do, you check it out –
the banner serves as entertainment while you wait. The
combination of long exposure and boredom while waiting
boosts Dwell Rate for Instant Messaging. It is the most
promising indication to date that shows that applicationbased
ads may even outperform browser-based ads as
technology continually moves forward, for example, mobile
platforms or tablet-based computing.
Dwell is also high in environments where users are immersed
in content for a long time. In News placements, users
spend a lot of time reading the content while their eyes are
moving back and forth on the webpage. This increases the
likelihood of seeing the banners and engaging with them.
The result is a higher Dwell Rate.
On the other hand, social networks tend to have relatively
lower ad duration. Users may be spending a lot of time
on social networks overall, but relatively little time on a
single webpage. Users log in multiple times per day to
update their status, check for messages and see what
their friends are doing, but that takes only a short amount
of time. Thus, users may not notice the banners and the
result is a lower Dwell Rate.
retweet this
8 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
2. Use video
Dwell Rate with and without Video
Display advertising competes with the publisher’s content.
Users browse to the webpage to engage with the publisher’s
content, while the advertiser’s job is to lure them to engage
with the ads.
One of the advantages of video banners is that the publisher’s
content is typically static. Therefore, moving pictures tend
to draw attention from the content to the ad. In the Video
Analytics Bulletin, 6 Eyeblaster Research showed that video
banners work best when the video is exposed to the user
at first glance. In some Expandable Banners, the video is
hidden behind the expanding panel. A good practice here
would be to have a light preview video visible at first glance to
invite users to expand the panel and view the full video.
The results are that video ads perform better than ads without
video. On average, adding video to ads increases the Dwell
Rate by 29% as compared to banners without video. Video
also nearly doubles the Dwell Time as compared to ads
without video. These results are similar across ad formats,
verticals and ad sizes.
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
Dwell Time with and without Video
Video uses both audio and visual elements to combine
senses and tell stories. With the rise of interactive video,
adding touch to audio-visual stimuli will only serve to increase
overall Dwell and increase residual brand effectiveness.
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
6
Eyeblaster. Analytics Bulletin: Online Video Advertising. Available for download at: http://www.eyeblaster.com/Content.aspx?page=resource&id=81
9 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
3. Get assertive
Good display ads are like good salesmen – they need the
right amount of chutzpah to get the job done. As with video
banners, ads that make an effort to be seen typically get
higher engagement from users. Clearly, there is a tradeoff
between higher Dwell Rate and higher Average Dwell Time.
Floating Ads and Commercial Breaks have a higher Dwell
Rate, while Expandable Banners and Polite Banners have
a lower Dwell Rate and a higher Average Dwell Time.
The leading Rich Media ad formats can be divided into
two main groups. Floating Ads and Commercial Breaks
tend to have very high breakthrough as evidenced by their
high Dwell Rate, but for a very short duration, typically of
around five seconds of Average Dwell Time. Floating ads are
shown over the publisher’s content and are highly visible.
Commercial Break is shown before the page is loaded for
a very short duration.
Dwell by Ad Format
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
10 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Both Commercial Breaks and Floating Ads tend to get a
high Dwell Rate. Many of these engagements are typically
attributed to users who try to close the banner in order
to view the publisher’s content, and as a result marketers
have tended to shy away from such formats for fear of
annoying users.
However, by removing the accidental interaction of less than
one second, we are still left with a positive indication that
these ads were engaged by consumers. Their low Dwell
time is related to the amount of time that these ads are
typically displayed on screen. These formats can do well
with short and concise marketing messages.
One of the most successful ways to deliver video is Eyeblaster
TV. Eyeblaster TV is a video delivered in a floating ad, with
the sound turned on by default with the volume on low.
This allows publishers with mostly textual content to deliver
ads transferred directly from TV with a more natural usage
pattern as opposed to merely serving them In-Stream.
As a result, Eyeblaster TV gets double the Dwell Rate of
regular video ads, while the Video Fully Played Rate is
similar to other ads, so users do not turn it off more often
than the typical video ad. This indicates that when used
wisely, default sound on can be accepted by consumers
in online advertising. For more on Eyeblaster TV, please
download the Analytics Bulletin on Video. 7
Polite Banners and Expandable Banners tend to have a
lower Dwell Rate. This could be seen as many initial loads
contain less visually engaging creativity, preferring to hide
the fun stuff behind even a click-to-expand in certain cases.
However, the main advantage here is in providing the stage
for longer and more complex marketing messages. Polite
Banners and Expandable Banners have a longer Average
Dwell Time, which works well for ads that require more
than a few seconds to understand.
7
Eyeblaster. Analytics Bulletin: Online Video Advertising. Available for download at: http://www.eyeblaster.com/Content.aspx?page=resource&id=81
11 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Conclusion
Dwell Rate is the best ubiquitous metric to measure the effectiveness of
Rich Media display advertising. Dwell offers a time-based measurement
of all media channels to ascertain if consumers are actually looking at
ads beyond panel based data alone. The research indicates that high
Dwell increases brand related searches, elevates site traffic, and boosts
brand engagement. Furthermore, ads with a higher Dwell Rate tend to
have a higher Conversion Rate on average. These results serve as an
indication to the validity of the metric.
There are three best practices that would help advertisers create better
campaigns with a higher Dwell Rate. First, placing ads in environments
in which users spend ample time tends to generate better Dwell Rate
results than environments with short exposure duration. Second, using
video tends to increase Dwell Rate, as video draws users’ eyes from
the publisher’s content. Last, exploring more visible ad formats may
lead to a higher Dwell Rate, while rewarding the consumer with more
engaging content increases Average Dwell Time, which in turn will drive
effective campaigns.
12 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Benchmarks
This edition of Eyeblaster Benchmarks provides a summary of the
results of campaigns that were served by Eyeblaster between Q1
2009 and Q4 2009. To produce these benchmarks, Eyeblaster
Research analyzed the results from 170 billion impressions
delivered in six different regions and more than 50 different
countries.
CTR by Region for Standard Banners and Rich Media
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
Overall global CTR is 0.23%. Rich Media tends to have much
higher CTR as compared to standard banners – 0.37% as
compared to 0.09%.
As far as regional differences are concerned, there is a clear rule
of thumb. If you are a former English speaking British colony,
your CTR and Dwell are likely to be lower. Thus, the US, Canada,
Australia and New Zealand have lower CTR performance as
compared to other regions. This is mainly due to differences
in user behavior and market maturity.
13 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Dwell by Region
Source: Eyeblaster Research. Data: Q1 2009 to Q4 2009, Worldwide.
South America, South Asia and Europe tend to have the highest
Dwell Rate, while East Asia has the highest Average Dwell
Time. Europe tends to have a significantly higher Dwell Rate as
compared to North America and Australia and New Zealand,
mostly due to differences in user behavior, though in part could
be seen in differences in current publisher restrictions.
The benchmark tables contain benchmark averages on
interactions, Dwell, clicks, expansions and video metrics. Data
is broken down by formats, sizes and verticals. The next 32
pages contain information on six regions and 24 countries.
The first two pages contain a full description of each vertical
and a definition for each of the metrics used.
One important caveat about using these benchmarks is that
they only present the average performance, while the deviation
in performance between ads is very large. As evidenced by the
size of the document, we have tried to slice the data into as many
categories as possible. Still, the averages contain campaigns
that are different in their nature, goals and execution. Therefore,
these benchmarks should be used as a reference only, and not
with the aim of trying to “beat the benchmark.”
retweet this
14 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
15 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
16 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
17 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
18 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
19 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
20 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
21 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
22 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
23 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
24 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
25 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
26 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
27 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
28 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
29 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
30 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
31 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
32 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
33 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
34 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
35 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
36 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
37 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
38 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
39 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
40 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
41 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
42 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
43 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
44 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
45 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
46 Eyeblaster benchmark insights

Benchmark Insights:
Using Dwell to Measure Advertising Effectiveness
Index
Verticals Definitions.......................................................................15
Metrics Definitions...........................................................................16
Regional Benchmarks
• North America................................................................................17
• Europe...........................................................................................18
• Australia and New Zealand.............................................................19
• East Asia........................................................................................20
• South Asia......................................................................................21
• Latin America.................................................................................22
Country Benchmarks
• Australia.........................................................................................23
• Brazil..............................................................................................24
• Canada..........................................................................................25
• Denmark........................................................................................26
• Finland...........................................................................................27
• France...........................................................................................28
• Germany........................................................................................29
• Hong Kong.....................................................................................30
• India...............................................................................................31
• Italy................................................................................................32
• Japan.............................................................................................33
• Malaysia.........................................................................................34
• Mexico...........................................................................................35
• Netherlands....................................................................................36
• Norway...........................................................................................37
• Portugal..........................................................................................38
• Singapore.......................................................................................39
• South Africa....................................................................................40
• Spain..............................................................................................41
• Sweden..........................................................................................42
• Taiwan............................................................................................43
• Thailand..........................................................................................44
• UK..................................................................................................45
• United States..................................................................................46
47 Eyeblaster benchmark insights