Which AdMaven zones send bots and invalid traffic?
Not all AdMaven traffic is equal. ValidVisit scores every visit 0–100 and pins it to the exact zone that sent it — so you can tell real humans from bots and invalid clicks, worst zones first.
source ID / sub-source ID in AdMavenPaste comma-separated Source IDs / Sub Source IDs (or bulk-upload CSV) into the campaign blacklist or the account-wide Global Blocked List, which auto-applies to all current and future campaigns.
ValidVisit reports the device, OS, browser — down to the version — plus the language and ISP behind every flagged visit, and AdMaven supports OS version, browser version, device type and connection type targeting. The segments we flag are segments you can exclude.
How invalid traffic slips in through AdMaven zones.
AdMaven runs a large pop, push and interstitial network sourced heavily from direct publishers, with reach that spans tier-1 markets down through long-tail regional inventory. Its key advantage for invalid-traffic control is granularity: on top of a {source_id} for the traffic source and a {click_id} that ties a session to your record, AdMaven exposes a {sub_source_id} — the specific site, widget or publisher behind each click. That is exactly the unit you can add to a campaign block list, so attribution at that level turns a vague "this campaign underperforms" into "these three sub-sources are the problem." ValidVisit captures those tokens as each click lands, then weighs the visit against 100+ independent data points — the network it travelled through, the device on the other end and how the visitor actually behaves — and folds them into one 0–100 quality score, so real people clear it and automated traffic stands apart. The verdict is reported back per sub_source_id.
Pop and push inventory has a structurally different IVT profile from intent formats, because the ad fires on page entry/exit or from a notification rather than a deliberate, considered click. On AdMaven the patterns ValidVisit surfaces cluster by sub-source. The most common is automated pop-loaders: scripts that trigger pop events at scale from server farms and proxied connections, concentrated in a handful of {sub_source_id} values rather than spread organically — a supply-side injection signature, not normal audience variation.
A second pattern is subscriber-list quality on the push side: a push feed built from incentivised or bot-inflated opt-ins clicks in unnaturally regular bursts aligned to send windows, and the way ValidVisit reads timing and environment together separates it from a genuine subscriber. A third is automation that hides behind a normal-looking browser — HTTP clients and modified browser builds that present a plausible user-agent but behave nothing like a real person once the full picture of the visit is scored, a gap that persists even when the surface details look right. Because every signal feeds a score tied to a {sub_source_id}, a single bad site or widget can be isolated from the rest of a campaign that is performing.
What to watch on AdMaven
Rank your active {sub_source_id} values by average quality score and by the share of visits in the suspect/invalid tier. Sub-sources running well above your campaign baseline are block-list candidates before you scale into them.
Automated pop traffic arriving through cloud hosting or proxied connections concentrates in specific sites/widgets. ValidVisit ties that finding back to the {sub_source_id} so you exclude the offending sub-source without touching ones delivering real users.
On the push side, unnaturally even click bursts aligned to notification schedules point to bot-inflated subscriber lists. The timing dimension of the score flags the sources where that pattern concentrates.
When a sub-source shows a high share of visits scoring as automated rather than human, it points to loaders and scripted browsers instead of real people — a read drawn from the full click picture, which is far harder to spoof than a user-agent string.
Pinpoint the bot publishers & placements in AdMaven.
AdMaven itself isn’t the problem — bots and invalid traffic concentrate in a handful of its sub-sources: the publisher, site or zone, and the placement or widget within it. So we roll the score up by those AdMaven tokens, not by creative (which says nothing about whether a click was human).
Bought as one AdMaven line, a buy reads as a single number. Scored per sub-source, a spread like this illustration runs from 94 down to 26 — the worst is nearly all bots. That’s the leak a blended average hides.
Illustrative: AdMaven traffic scored 0–100 per sub-source, worst first — down to the placement you buy.
Bot / invalid-traffic score broken down by:
- Sub-source / Site ID
{sub_source_id}Sub-level source segmentation (site / widget / publisher) — the unit you add to the campaign block list.
Per-click id: AdMaven passes a unique click id, so we also run velocity, deduplication and repeat-source checks on every visit.
Compare bot & invalid-traffic breakdown across every ad network →See your own AdMaven sub-sources scored this way.
How ValidVisit attributes AdMaven traffic
Each AdMaven macro maps to a normalized parameter, so every scored click is pinned to the right campaign, creative and publisher.
https://yoursite.com/landing?utm_source=admaven&utm_medium=pop&vv_campaign_id={:campaign_id}&vv_source={source_id}&vv_publisher_id={sub_source_id}&vv_click_id={click_id}| Token | AdMaven macro | Maps to | Identifies |
|---|---|---|---|
| Campaign ID | {:campaign_id} | campaign_id | campaign |
| Source ID | {source_id} | source | source |
| Sub-source / Site ID | {sub_source_id} | publisher_id | publisher |
| Click ID | {click_id} | click_id | click |
- AdMaven macro
{:campaign_id}- Maps to
- campaign_id
- Identifies
- campaign
- AdMaven macro
{source_id}- Maps to
- source
- Identifies
- source
- AdMaven macro
{sub_source_id}- Maps to
- publisher_id
- Identifies
- publisher
- AdMaven macro
{click_id}- Maps to
- click_id
- Identifies
- click
How the detection works.
Data points → one score
Every visit is weighed against more than a hundred independent data points and reduced to a single, sortable 0–100 quality score.
Many angles, combined
Each data point is combined rather than checked in isolation, so a genuine human almost never trips enough of them to be flagged — and bots that beat one rarely beat the rest.
Proprietary, not a black box
The detection model is ours and stays that way. What you get is a clear verdict on every visit — not a single brittle rule you can game, and not an unexplained number you can’t act on.
Pinned to the source
Every verdict maps to the campaign, publisher and placement that sent the click — so you know exactly which source to cut.
How ValidVisit helps you cut fraud and bad source ID / sub-source IDs on AdMaven.
Scoring and attribution are the means — the point is cutting the AdMaven traffic that wastes your spend. Here’s how ValidVisit gets you a list you can act on.
- Score
See what’s actually landing
You buy AdMaven clicks; what arrives are visits. ValidVisit scores each one 0–100 so real humans stand out from bots and invalid traffic — one script, no funnel hop, no fingerprinting.
- Attribute
Pin the fraud to its source
Every scored visit is tied to the exact AdMaven source ID / sub-source ID and zone via the network’s own tokens — so the bad traffic has an address, not just a headline percentage.
- Cut
Take the source ID / sub-source IDs off your buy
You get the worst offenders as a ready-to-use list plus postbacks to your tracker — so you can exclude them in AdMaven and put your next dollar behind the traffic that converts.
AdMaven traffic quality, answered.
What does the AdMaven integration involve on my end?
Two things: drop ValidVisit’s script onto your landing page, and carry AdMaven’s own macros — {source_id}, {sub_source_id}, {campaign} and {click_id} — through as URL parameters on your destination link. When the visitor lands, the pixel reads those values, scores the visit, and files the verdict under that {click_id}, which is what gives you a per-sub-source audit trail afterward. Because all of this happens once the click has already landed, there’s nothing added to the pop/push event itself.
Does ValidVisit hand me a list of AdMaven sub-sources worth cutting?
That’s the core deliverable, yes. {sub_source_id} is attached to every scored click, so ValidVisit can break your sites/widgets down by quality distribution and flag exactly what’s dragging each one down — cloud hosting, proxied connections, scripted clients, behaviour that doesn’t add up. From there it’s on you to take the worst performers and add them to AdMaven’s campaign block list; ValidVisit surfaces the ranking and the reasoning, but the block itself is applied inside your AdMaven account.
Doesn’t AdMaven already filter this traffic for me?
Not really. AdMaven’s filter is the network grading its own inventory before it ever reaches you. ValidVisit is a second, independent measurement run on the traffic that actually lands on your page, so sub-sources that clear AdMaven’s own bar can still turn out to underperform for you specifically — and you get the evidence for why, rather than having to take it on faith.
Detect fraud on other pop / pop-under networks
AdOperator
AdsCompass
Adsterra
DAO.ADFind the bots in your AdMaven spend.
See which publishers and placements send real buyers vs bots — every visit scored 0–100, worst first.
Free trial at launch · just your email
One script · no cookies · no fingerprinting · raw IP never stored