Known Bots & Spiders
Search engine crawlers (Googlebot, Bingbot) and other declared bots on the IAB/ABC International Spiders & Bots List. These identify themselves through user-agent strings.
Fraud Type Guide
Invalid traffic costs advertisers billions annually. Understand the full IVT taxonomy — from known bots to sophisticated human fraud — and learn how to protect your campaigns.
Invalid traffic (IVT) is the umbrella term for any ad interaction that does not come from a real, interested human user. Defined by the Media Rating Council (MRC) and the IAB Tech Lab, IVT encompasses everything from known search engine crawlers to sophisticated fraud operations using hijacked devices and human fraud farms.
IVT is divided into two main categories: GIVT (General Invalid Traffic), which can be detected through routine filtering, and SIVT (Sophisticated Invalid Traffic), which requires advanced analytics and multi-point corroboration to identify.
For advertisers, invalid traffic represents one of the most significant threats to digital marketing effectiveness. It drains budgets, corrupts data, distorts attribution, and undermines the algorithms that ad platforms use to optimise campaign delivery. Without proper detection and filtering, advertisers make decisions based on data that includes non-human activity — leading to systematically worse outcomes over time.
GIVT is the “easier to detect” category of invalid traffic. It includes non-human traffic that can be identified through routine, standardised methods using known lists and basic checks.
Search engine crawlers (Googlebot, Bingbot) and other declared bots on the IAB/ABC International Spiders & Bots List. These identify themselves through user-agent strings.
Traffic originating from known hosting providers and cloud services rather than residential connections. Legitimate users rarely browse from AWS, Google Cloud, or similar infrastructure.
Browser pre-fetching that loads pages before a user visits them. These generate ad impressions and page loads for content the user may never actually see.
Uptime monitors, ad verification scanners, SEO crawlers, and accessibility checkers that visit pages as part of automated quality assurance rather than genuine interest.
SIVT is the harder-to-detect category, encompassing traffic specifically designed to evade standard filters. It requires advanced detection methods and is responsible for the majority of financial damage from ad fraud.
Malware-infected consumer devices that generate ad traffic without the owner's knowledge. Because they use real residential IPs and genuine devices, they appear legitimate to basic filters.
Physical operations with workers who manually click ads, fill forms, and generate fake engagement. Real humans on real devices make this traffic extremely difficult to detect.
Pixel stuffing, ad stacking, and off-screen placements that serve ads invisibly. Impressions are counted and billed but never seen by a human.
Techniques that drop tracking cookies without user knowledge to claim credit for organic conversions. Affiliates and publishers use this to steal attribution from legitimate sources.
Fraudsters generate fake app install signals without actually installing the app. They reverse-engineer the SDK communication protocol to send fabricated install reports to attribution platforms.
Low-quality publishers misrepresent their inventory as belonging to premium domains. Advertisers pay premium CPMs for traffic that actually appears on fraudulent or low-quality sites.
The damage from invalid traffic extends far beyond wasted ad spend. It creates a cascade of problems that affect every aspect of your digital marketing operation.
Every invalid click or impression is money spent on a non-human interaction. Industry estimates suggest 10-30% of digital ad spend goes to invalid traffic when campaigns lack protection.
Invalid traffic pollutes every metric you track — bounce rates, conversion rates, time on site, CTR. Decisions based on IVT-polluted data are inherently flawed.
Ad platform algorithms learn from engagement signals. Invalid traffic teaches them to optimise toward fraudulent sources, progressively degrading performance as machines learn the wrong patterns.
Invalid interactions claim credit for conversions they had no influence on. Attribution models become unreliable, and you invest more in channels that deliver invalid traffic rather than customers.
Opticks detects both GIVT and SIVT in real time using 30+ fraud signals — from bot-list matching and data-centre identification to behavioural analysis and device farm detection.
Reports separate GIVT from SIVT and break down invalid traffic by type, source, campaign, and time period. You see exactly what kind of fraud affects each part of your funnel.
Opticks correlates patterns across all your campaigns and channels, identifying fraud sources that target multiple advertisers and revealing coordinated fraud operations.
Keep Exploring
Most advertisers are surprised by the amount of invalid traffic in their campaigns. Opticks gives you complete visibility into both GIVT and SIVT across every channel.