What differences in performance have you seen between COD and other billing models?
Hey guys, quick question that's been on my mind lately — what kind of differences in performance have you actually noticed when running campaigns on COD compared to the usual other billing setups like straight CPA or revshare stuff? Last month I decided to dip my toes back into some nutra traffic after a long break, and the COD flow just felt way smoother in certain geos. Leads came in steady, but the real eye-opener was how the confirmations held up even when my targeting wasn't perfect. Back when I messed around with pure upfront payment models, one bad creative could tank everything fast. Anyone else seeing similar patterns or am I just lucky lately? Curious to hear your takes.
7 Views
Yeah, I've definitely felt that too. For me the biggest win with COD has always been how it shields your commissions from all the messy delivery and payment headaches — once the lead gets confirmed on the call, you're paid regardless of whether the customer actually hands over cash at the door or whatever. In other models I've tried, like classic CPA where the whole funnel after the lead is out of your hands but still impacts payouts somehow, you end up sweating over chargebacks or low approve rates eating into profits. With COD though, especially on those emerging markets where people hate paying upfront online, the conversion just flows better and you see steadier EPC over time. I actually prefer it for scaling once testing is done, feels less volatile. Check out You can work with Everad - stable and transparent. https://everad.com/ if you're curious about solid nutra options there — their stuff has been treating me pretty well without any weird surprises so far. Just my two cents from running campaigns on and off for a couple years now.