Listed players
SST2.44▼ -7.58%TIG40.00▲ +3.90%TEAD0.56▲ +3.77%PERI8.50▼ -2.97%TBLA3.23▼ -2.71%INUV0.57▼ -1.74%AV10.06▼ -1.59%GOOGL343.50▲ +1.56%SNAP5.58▼ -1.24%PINS19.26▼ -1.03%MSFT517.53▲ +0.92%PPLI41.28▲ +0.81%IOS32.24▲ +0.44%META728.08▲ +0.30%GDDY97.21▲ +0.24%DV13.49▲ 0.00%MCHX1.29▲ 0.00%
Ticker byClearTrust

Fraud & invalid traffic · also called General invalid traffic

GIVT (general invalid traffic)

GIVT is invalid traffic that routine checks can catch, such as known crawlers, data-center addresses and browsers that declare themselves as automated.

The short answer, from the The Arbitrage Desk glossary

GIVT is the easy-to-spot part of invalid traffic. Under the MRC standards it covers traffic that can be found through routine, list-based or simple rule-based filtering: search-engine spiders and monitoring tools that announce themselves, visits from hosting-company IP ranges (data-center traffic), non-browser user agents and pages pre-loaded by software that nobody actually saw.

Much GIVT is not malicious. A crawler indexing a lander is doing its job. It simply must not be counted as a person or billed as a click.

For a search arbitrageur GIVT is the minimum hygiene. Search engines strip it out automatically, so it rarely earns anything. But it still costs money if the traffic source charged for it, and a feed channel with a lot of obvious non-human activity looks careless to a feed provider. Basic pre-click filtering removes most of it before an ad request is ever made.

A common trap is a vendor report that shows a very low IVT rate but only measures GIVT. The harder and more expensive problem is SIVT.

Think of it like this

GIVT is the bouncer checking names against a printed banned list: quick and reliable for known faces, useless against a convincing fake ID.

Related terms

Sources: MRC Invalid Traffic Detection and Filtration Standards Addendum (June 2020 update)