October brought plenty of discussion around some of the industry’s most talked-about topics, from The Trade Desk’s new OpenAds wrapper and the growing adoption of Prebid Mobile 3.0 to updates in the latest Prebid SDK and Prebid’s multi-TID approach. In this month’s wrap, we take a closer look at what these developments mean for publishers:
First thoughts about The Trade Desk’s OpenAds. Will it be a transparency win or another layer of complexity?
The Trade Desk recently introduced a new wrapper called OpenAds, designed to enhance transparency and efficiency between DSPs and publishers.
However, some in the industry see OpenAds more as a display of The Trade Desk’s market power than a genuine step toward openness. In the United States, where The Trade Desk dominates the independent DSP market, the initiative is viewed as part of a broader strategy to strengthen further its influence — particularly in a market where it already holds a firm foothold. By gaining more direct control over auctions, pricing, and data flows, The Trade Desk could increase its margins and visibility while reducing its reliance on SSP partners.
Although OpenAds is presented as an “open” wrapper aimed at simplifying integrations and improving efficiency, publishers fear it could evolve into a semi-closed ecosystem — a structure in which access to The Trade Desk’s demand would be tied to adopting OpenAds. If that happens, the initiative might consolidate The Trade Desk’s power rather than increase transparency, further strengthening its position across the programmatic supply chain. For now, it remains an interesting initiative to watch, but one that raises familiar questions about power, control, and who ultimately benefits.
As Prebid Mobile 3.0 gains traction and SDK 4.0 is on the way, what’s holding publishers back from in-app header bidding? What success stories or pain points are we hearing from those who’ve tried it?
Adoption of Prebid Mobile is growing fast. At this point, Prebid SDK is installed on 2000+ apps worldwide. However, there is still hesitation from many publishers who cite technical complexity, fragmented SDK environments, and maintenance challenges as barriers. Bidder and SSP readiness also varies, meaning the yield uplift depends heavily on which partners are plugged in. On iOS, privacy changes like ATT and SKAdNetwork add further complications. Meanwhile, closed mediation platforms such as AppLovin, Unity, and AdMob continue to dominate the mobile ecosystem, making it harder for open-source alternatives like Prebid to gain traction, especially among publishers already entrenched in traditional mediation setups.
Despite these challenges, publishers who have followed best practices with Prebid Mobile, like keeping SDKs updated, coordinating closely with app developers, and testing compatibility, report meaningful CPM gains, sometimes over 10%, along with more transparency and direct advertiser payments compared to traditional mediation. WetterOnline is a prime example of good Prebid Mobile implementation that results in substantial uplifts.
The general consensus is that Prebid Mobile works best as an additive demand source rather than a full mediation replacement, as it puts pressure on AdX to bid higher in the auctions. At the moment, in our experience, early adopters show strong results when they treat it as a strategic, incremental upgrade instead of a plug-and-play fix.
What’s the real impact of Prebid’s new multi-TID approach on their revenue tracking and buyer relationships??
Transaction IDs (TIDs) have always been optional in Prebid.js and required manual activation by the publisher. The latest update (Prebid.js 10.9) replaced the shared global TID with SSP-specific identifiers (“multi-TID”), following a community vote aimed at giving publishers greater control and addressing concerns about buyers gaining excessive visibility into auctions and floor prices.
Now, Prebid.org has announced that it will soon release an additional update allowing publishers to choose whether to send a global or SSP-specific TID. According to Prebid.org, only about 1% of all Prebid traffic currently uses the new SSP-specific logic, while most continue to send global TIDs under older versions.
Relevant Digital conducted a month-long test across European publisher environments, comparing auction results with and without TIDs. Using Relevant Yield, we tracked key KPIs — eCPM, fill rate, bid rate, timeouts, and win rate — and found no significant differences. In other words, performance remained stable regardless of whether TIDs were active.
This aligns with what many in the industry have observed: TIDs have not yet been adopted as a consistent or reliable signal. Some SSPs generate their own identifiers, while others ignore them altogether. Thus, while the multi-TID update may theoretically affect buyer–seller dynamics, its practical impact has so far been limited — at least for now.