Platform Comparisons
Comparing retail ad servers and marketplace monetisation tools
Compare Kevel, Criteo Commerce Yield and Microsoft Retail Media by serving, buyer access, catalogue and reporting needs.
Compare platforms against the retailer’s selling workload. An ad server selects an eligible ad for a placement.
A marketplace monetisation arrangement also needs a way to manage buyers, seller and product permissions, campaign review, demand routes and commercial reporting.
One product may cover several jobs, but a feature list does not show how the proposed account operates.
Kevel, Criteo Commerce Yield and Microsoft Retail Media offer three documented approaches to examine. This is a shortlist for questioning, not a ranking or confirmation of Australian account access.
Give every candidate the same brief
Specify a search-results placement, a product-detail placement, the seller and brand hierarchy, advertiser roles, an out-of-stock rule and the report a buyer must receive. Ask each provider to show who configures the rule, who can override it and what the retailer can export.
Decision / Evidence to request
- Ad selection
- Eligible products, campaign priority and fallback behaviour
- Buyer access
- Seller, brand, catalogue and audience permissions by interface
- Selling route
- Managed, self-service and partner demand actually enabled
- Retail control
- Placement exclusions, approvals and change history
- Reporting
- Delivery and sales definitions, fields and export route
- Commercial terms
- Written fees, responsibilities and data handover
Key Features Comparison: Kevel, Criteo Commerce Yield, and Microsoft Retail Media
- Ad Selection LogicKevel: campaign priority, fallback behaviour; Criteo: bid, date, budget/pacing; Microsoft: native decisioning via retailer site
- Buyer Access ControlKevel: API-based permissions; Criteo: seller/brand/catalogue roles; Microsoft: seller permissions in proposed account
- Selling Routes SupportedKevel: self-service, managed direct, programmatic partner; Criteo: line-item review centre, private markets; Microsoft: onsite + offsite network
- Catalogue ManagementKevel: uses Catalog for attribution; Criteo: requires unique consistent product ID; Microsoft: catalogue ingestion in Australian account
- Reporting & AttributionKevel: last-touch attribution with exportable reports; Criteo: supply-side yield reporting; Microsoft: report fields in proposed setup
- Retail Control & ApprovalsKevel: placement exclusions, change history; Criteo: line-item review; Microsoft: onsite decisioning control
Kevel: configurable serving and catalogue use
Kevel’s retail media guide covers Ad Decisioning, Reporting, Catalog for Sponsored Listings and Campaign Management; its documentation also identifies the Kevel Management API. The guide describes self-service, managed direct and programmatic partner routes.
Retailers’ own systems can read and honour advertiser product-catalogue access settings through the Kevel Management API. The Ad Server UI does not restrict access based on those settings, while Kevel Console does.
Kevel attribution reporting requires Catalog. Kevel currently supports last-touch attribution.
Criteo Commerce Yield: selling and yield controls
Criteo describes onsite inventory and first-party data monetisation, supply-side reporting, yield and data-rate management, a line-item review centre and private-market campaign tools. Its campaign documentation places promoted products in retailer-specific line items; onsite sponsored-product line items have bid, date and optional budget and pacing controls.
Criteo’s retailer feed specification requires a unique, consistent ID for each product variant; changes to product IDs can break attribution and reporting. Ask which demand entry points, formats, approvals, account roles and exports the proposed retailer will receive.
Microsoft Retail Media: onsite ads within a wider offering
Microsoft describes native product ads on retailer websites and apps, plus offsite and network offerings. Its public page labels in-store activity a pilot.
Ask Microsoft to demonstrate the proposed Australian account’s catalogue ingestion, seller permissions, onsite decisioning and report fields.
Decide from the proposed configuration
Request a configuration walkthrough, sample report and written commercial terms.
A bounded acceptance exercise could use authorised test products to check an eligible item, an unavailable item and a seller who must not be allowed to promote a particular product.
Record any account-dependent function as unconfirmed until the provider demonstrates it.
Evaluation Process for Retail Media Platforms
- Request configuration walkthroughDemonstrate ad serving, buyer access, and reporting in the proposed Australian account
- Review sample reportCheck delivery metrics, sales definitions, and export format
- Confirm commercial termsVerify written fees, responsibilities, data handover, and ATO-compliant recordkeeping
- Run bounded acceptance testTest eligible, out-of-stock, and restricted seller scenarios using authorised products
- Record unconfirmed functionsOnly confirm features demonstrated live; document any missing or uncertain capabilities
