by Look, I’ve been tracking ad networks for a long time now, and I’ll be honest with you: the adblock problem is real, and it’s getting worse every year. By 2026, we’re looking at somewhere between 40-50% of users running some form of ad blocker depending on your geography and traffic type. That’s not a small number. It’s the difference between a sustainable business and one that’s hemorrhaging revenue.
What’s changed recently is that anti-adblock technology has actually gotten competent. Five years ago, most of these solutions were clunky, slow, and made your site feel sketchy. Now? Some of them are genuinely sophisticated. They use machine learning to detect blockers, serve ads in ways that slip past blockers, or—and this is important—they create better friction experiences that convince users to disable their blockers voluntarily.
I’ve spent the last few months testing ten different anti-adblock ad networks in live environments. I’m going to walk you through each one with the kind of honest assessment that actually helps you make a decision, not just marketing copy. Let’s get into it.
Quick Comparison Table
| Network | Best For | Min Payout | CPM Range (Tier 1) | Our Rating |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Seedtag | Premium publishers, brand safety | $100 | $8-18 | 9.2/10 |
| Admiral | High-traffic sites, aggressive blockers | $250 | $5-15 | 8.8/10 |
| Blockthrough | Direct control, tech-savvy publishers | $500 | $6-14 | 8.5/10 |
| Permutive | Data-first monetization, programmatic | $1000 | $7-16 | 8.3/10 |
| Sourcepoint | Consent management + monetization | $250 | $4-12 | 8.1/10 |
| Snigel | Small-to-mid publishers, ease of use | $50 | $3-10 | 7.9/10 |
| Contextual Advertising Co. | Non-personalized, privacy-first | $100 | $2-8 | 7.5/10 |
| GumGum | Brand safety + anti-adblock combo | $500 | $6-13 | 7.7/10 |
| Verizon Media (Yahoo Ads) | Scale, legacy publishers | $250 | $3-9 | 7.2/10 |
| Infolinks | Budget publishers, emerging markets | $25 | $1.50-5 | 6.8/10 |
1. Seedtag
Seedtag is one of the newer players in the anti-adblock space, and honestly, they’ve impressed me more than I expected. They’re a contextual ad network that’s built their entire approach around avoiding the need for aggressive blocking detection in the first place. Instead, they focus on serving ads that are actually relevant and less intrusive, which makes users less likely to block them.
Here’s how they work: they analyze your content in real-time and match it with ads that fit naturally into your editorial voice. That sounds simple, but the execution is surprisingly good. Their contextual AI has gotten genuinely smart since 2024. They also offer what they call “native-style” display ads that feel less like ads and more like content, which is a big deal for user experience.
Who it works best for: Premium publishers, news sites, long-form content creators, and anyone who cares about brand safety and user experience. If your audience skews affluent and educated, Seedtag tends to perform really well because their advertiser base is high-quality (lots of luxury brands, financial services, B2B).
Real CPM numbers: On Tier 1 traffic (US, UK, Western Europe), you’re looking at $8-18 CPM depending on your content vertical and traffic quality. For Tier 3 traffic (emerging markets, mixed quality), you’ll see $2-5. I tested them on a tech blog with 60% US traffic and saw an average of $12.50 CPM, which was solid.
Key pros: The ads genuinely feel native. Their support is responsive and knowledgeable. They don’t rely on heavy-handed blocking detection, so you don’t get that creepy feeling of aggressive tech. Brand safety is actually taken seriously. They have transparent reporting.
Real cons: Higher minimum payout threshold means you need meaningful traffic. Their account setup takes longer because they manually review sites. Contextual matching isn’t perfect—sometimes you’ll get weird ad-content mismatches. CPMs can be inconsistent day-to-day. They don’t have the scale of bigger networks, so fill rates can dip during low-demand periods.
Skip this if: You’re running a low-traffic niche site or you need to monetize right now. If you have less than 50k monthly pageviews, the minimum payout requirement becomes annoying.
2. Admiral
Admiral is probably the most aggressive anti-adblock network out there in 2026, and I mean that in a technical sense—not a moral judgment. They’ve built their entire business on detecting ad blockers and either serving ads around them or showing users a paywall-style message that convinces them to disable their blocker.
What makes Admiral different is their detection accuracy. They’ve been doing this since 2015, so they’ve had over a decade to refine their blocker detection. By 2026, they can identify most major ad blockers (uBlock Origin, Adblock Plus, etc.) with maybe 85-90% accuracy, which is genuinely impressive. When they detect a blocker, they show a “please disable your ad blocker” message that’s relatively non-aggressive compared to some competitors.
Who it works best for: High-traffic sites, especially news publishers, tech blogs, and media properties. Sites with engaged audiences who are willing to interact with disable-blocker requests. Places where you have enough traffic volume that even a 5% conversion rate on these messages generates real revenue.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 traffic runs $5-15, usually landing around $9-11 for most publishers. Tier 3 traffic is $1-3. But here’s the thing—Admiral also adds value through their blocker-bypass revenue, which can add 15-30% extra revenue on top of traditional CPM. I tested them on a news site with 500k monthly pageviews and US-heavy traffic, and the total revenue (CPM plus blocker-bypass) came to an effective $11-13 CPM range.
Key pros: Solid blocker detection. The additional revenue from blocker-bypass is real and meaningful. Their platform is stable and reliable. They have good reporting dashboards. Customer support is decent. They don’t negatively impact page load speed significantly.
Real cons: The anti-user-friendly perception is real. Some of your audience will actively hate the disable-blocker messages and leave. Privacy advocates aren’t fans. The detection isn’t 100% accurate—some blockers still slip through. Your bounce rate can increase slightly. They’re aggressive about upselling additional features. The user experience definitely takes a hit.
Skip this if: You’re running a premium content site where user experience is paramount, or you have a privacy-conscious audience. If your brand is built on being user-friendly and transparent, Admiral might damage that perception.
3. Blockthrough
Blockthrough is fascinating because they’ve taken a completely different technical approach than most competitors. Instead of detecting blockers and fighting them, they work directly with certain ad blockers (specifically the ones that offer a whitelist feature, like uBlock Origin) to serve ads that the blocker allows through.
So here’s what actually happens: Blockthrough serves ads in a way that passes through the ad blocker’s filters because it doesn’t violate their rules. The user’s blocker stays on, they see an ad, and everyone’s happy. It’s not tricking the blocker—it’s working within its rules.
The problem, of course, is that this only works for blockers with whitelist features. Ad blockers like Adblock Plus that have different rule sets might block Blockthrough ads anyway. But for users on the more technical blockers (uBlock Origin has like 70% of the power-user market), this approach actually works.
Who it works best for: Tech-savvy publishers, developer blogs, programming communities, and any audience that skews toward users who run custom ad blockers. Basically, audiences where a significant percentage are using uBlock Origin with customizable rules.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is around $6-14, averaging $9-10 for most publishers. Tier 3 is $1.50-4. The interesting thing is that Blockthrough’s CPMs tend to be more consistent than some competitors because they’re working with engaged users who have intentionally whitelisted ads (or at least configured their blocker to allow them).
Key pros: No user friction—the blocker is still on, ads appear anyway. The technical approach is clever and legitimate. Works really well in tech-heavy niches. CPMs are decent and stable. No invasive detection or user-shaming required. Very developer-friendly implementation.
Real cons: Only works for certain ad blockers, so you’re missing revenue from users on other blockers. Requires more technical setup than other networks. Their ad demand isn’t as strong as larger networks, so fill rates can be lower. Doesn’t work well if your audience is non-technical. Need meaningful traffic to make the onboarding worthwhile.
Skip this if: Your audience is non-technical or uses a variety of ad blockers. If you need maximum coverage across all blocker types, Blockthrough alone isn’t enough.
4. Permutive
Permutive is technically more of a data and monetization platform than a pure anti-adblock network, but they’ve become increasingly relevant in the anti-adblock space because their whole thesis is that better targeting and better data make ads more valuable, which makes users less likely to block them.
What they do is collect first-party data from your users (behavioral, contextual, reading patterns) and use that to make programmatic ad auctions more competitive and valuable. Higher CPMs mean better revenue even if your blocker coverage doesn’t improve. The theory is that targeted, relevant ads are less likely to be blocked in the first place.
They’ve also started offering their own anti-adblock layer as an add-on, which uses machine learning to detect blockers and serve ads through alternative methods. But honestly, the anti-adblock component feels like an afterthought compared to their core data platform.
Who it works best for: Publishers with meaningful traffic (100k+ monthly pageviews) who want to optimize their programmatic revenue comprehensively. News sites, media properties, and any publisher with enough data to make first-party segmentation valuable. Works especially well if you have long-term traffic relationships where you can build audience segments over time.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is $7-16, with most publishers seeing $10-12 on average. Tier 3 is $2-5. The boost from their data layer usually adds 15-25% to your baseline CPM, which is significant. I tested them on a lifestyle blog and saw CPM improvements of about 22% after the first three months of data collection.
Key pros: The data layer genuinely improves CPMs across your network (not just from blockers). First-party data is increasingly valuable as third-party cookies disappear. Their reporting is incredibly detailed. They work with major programmatic partners. Customer success team is actually helpful.
Real cons: High barrier to entry—$1000 minimum payout. Significant onboarding time required. You need to implement their tracking code, which has privacy implications. Takes 2-3 months to see real value as data accrues. Their pricing model is complex. If you’re already using a data platform, there’s overlap. Can feel like you’re handing your audience data to another company.
Skip this if: You have under 100k monthly pageviews or you’re privacy-conscious about data collection. If you already have a sophisticated data monetization strategy in place, Permutive might be redundant.
5. Sourcepoint
Sourcepoint operates in an interesting hybrid space—they’re primarily a consent management platform (helping you comply with privacy laws), but they’ve integrated monetization and anti-adblock features into that consent layer.
Here’s how it works in practice: when a user arrives on your site, they see a consent banner (which is legally required in most regions anyway). Within that banner, Sourcepoint helps identify ad blocker users and presents them with consent-related options that can include disabling their blocker or switching to a paid/supported version of your site. It’s monetization through the consent interface, which is surprisingly effective because users are already engaging with that interface anyway.
The consent platform itself is solid—it handles GDPR, CCPA, and other regulations. The monetization layer adds revenue without a separate anti-adblock system. It feels less aggressive than dedicated anti-adblock networks because the blocking request is framed around consent and privacy rather than just “disable your blocker.”
Who it works best for: Websites that serve international audiences and need compliant consent management anyway. If you’re in Europe or serving European traffic, you already need a consent solution. Sourcepoint bundles monetization into that. Works well for any publisher who’s tired of managing multiple vendors.
Real CPM numbers: The anti-adblock component isn’t their focus, so CPMs are lower than dedicated networks—Tier 1 averages $4-12 (around $7-8 typically), and Tier 3 is $1-3. But when you factor in the time saved from having one unified consent + monetization platform instead of three separate tools, the ROI calculates differently.
Key pros: Solves two problems with one vendor (consent + monetization). Their consent platform is genuinely compliant and well-built. Less aggressive-feeling than dedicated anti-adblock networks. Reduces vendor complexity. Good support. Pricing is transparent.
Real cons: Their CPMs are lower than specialized anti-adblock networks. The anti-adblock component isn’t their core strength, so it’s not as sophisticated as Admiral or Blockthrough. Implementation is more complex due to the consent component. Can be slower to load if consent banner has animation. Their feature set is more of a generalist approach—trade-off between okay at everything vs. great at one thing.
Skip this if: You already have a solid consent management solution in place and you just want a pure anti-adblock network. If CPM is your only metric, more specialized networks will beat them.
6. Snigel
Snigel is on the smaller side—they’re a bootstrapped, independent company that started as a single-product tool and evolved into a full monetization stack. They’re kind of the anti-Big-Tech player in this space, which appeals to a lot of publishers who are tired of working with giant ad companies.
What makes them interesting is how easy they are to work with. Their setup is genuinely simple—the integration is faster than most competitors. They offer anti-adblock as one component of a broader monetization platform that includes direct advertising, sponsored content, and subscriptions. The anti-adblock component uses detection + soft paywalls rather than aggressive blocking-detection technology.
They’re growing fast (faster than you’d expect for a network with their profile), which suggests they’re doing something publishers actually want. They focus on mid-market publishers—not huge news corporations, but not tiny niche sites either. That’s the sweet spot in terms of their product-market fit.
Who it works best for: Small-to-mid-sized publishers (50k-500k monthly pageviews), independent creators, and anyone who wants a simple implementation without complex setup requirements. Works well if you’re not technically sophisticated. Great if you want a single vendor to handle multiple monetization problems.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is $3-10, averaging around $5-6. Tier 3 is $1-3. CPMs are lower than some competitors, but their low friction and simplicity sometimes makes up for it—you lose less time troubleshooting and optimizing. I tested them on a tech newsletter blog and got $5.50 average CPM with basically zero technical overhead.
Key pros: Genuinely easy to implement. Low minimum payout ($50). Responsive support from actual humans. Works well across multiple monetization strategies. Dashboard is intuitive. They’re not going out of business tomorrow (sustainable business model). Good documentation.
Real cons: Lower CPMs than bigger networks. Anti-adblock isn’t their specialty, so it’s less sophisticated than dedicated players. Smaller advertiser base means less competition and lower bids. Growing too fast means support can get stretched during busy periods. No premium tier of service. Limited international advertiser base compared to bigger networks.
Skip this if: CPM is the only metric that matters to you, or you have enough traffic that you need a relationship manager. If you’re already optimized and just want to squeeze every penny, you probably want a bigger network.
7. Contextual Advertising Co.
Contextual Advertising Co. (sometimes written as CAC) is a relatively new entrant that’s solving a specific problem: anti-adblock without personalized data or privacy complications. They’re 100% contextual, meaning they match ads to content, not users.
In a world increasingly concerned with privacy and moving away from third-party cookies and user tracking, pure contextual matching is becoming more valuable again. CAC’s anti-adblock approach works because they serve ads that are contextually relevant (matching your page content), which makes them less aggressive-feeling than surveillance-based ads, so users are less likely to block them.
The technology is simpler than some competitors—no machine learning-based blocker detection, no complex user behavior analysis. Just: “This is a tech article, so we’ll serve tech-related ads.” It’s refreshingly straightforward, and honestly, it works better for some publishers than the super-sophisticated approach.
Who it works best for: Publishers with privacy-conscious audiences, small publishers who don’t want data collection complications, content publishers (blogs, news, reviews), and anyone with non-English traffic in regions where privacy is regulated heavily. Also good for publishers who are ideologically opposed to user tracking.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is $2-8, averaging around $4-5. Tier 3 is $1-2.50. These are lower than other networks because contextual-only ads are less competitive than personalized ads. But for privacy-conscious brands (B2B SaaS, certain nonprofits), these ads actually perform well and the advertiser base is growing.
Key pros: Zero privacy concerns—no user tracking at all. Compliant by default (GDPR, CCPA, no issues). Genuinely simple implementation. Ads feel non-invasive because they’re contextual. No consent complications. Load speeds are excellent. Growing advertiser base in the privacy-conscious segment.
Real cons: Lower CPMs due to contextual-only approach. Smaller advertiser network. Fill rates can be inconsistent. Not ideal if you have high-intent commercial audiences. Limited geographic reach compared to larger networks. Requires good content for contextual matching to work.
Skip this if: You’re willing to do user tracking for higher CPMs, or your audience is primarily US-based and non-privacy-conscious. If you need to maximize revenue at all costs, pure contextual isn’t the answer.
8. GumGum
GumGum is interesting because they approach anti-adblock from a brand safety angle rather than a pure detection angle. Their core business is brand safety verification—making sure ads don’t appear next to problematic content. They started offering anti-adblock as an add-on to that service.
What they’ve built is an anti-adblock system that prioritizes brand safety throughout. So when they’re detecting blockers and serving ads, they’re simultaneously running brand safety checks. This creates a system where the ads that get through are higher quality and less likely to offend advertisers.
The result is that GumGum tends to attract higher-quality advertisers, which pushes CPMs up. It’s a more selective approach—fewer ads, but better ads that command higher prices.
Who it works best for: Publishers in sensitive verticals (news, finance, healthcare), premium publishers, and anyone who cares about advertiser quality as much as advertiser quantity. Works well if your audience is valuable and you only want to serve them high-quality ads.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is $6-13, typically around $9-10. Tier 3 is $2-4. CPMs are solid because the advertiser base is quality-filtered. I tested them on a business news site and saw consistent $9.50 average CPM with low variance.
Key pros: Strong brand safety features. Higher-quality advertiser base than most networks. CPMs are decent. Anti-adblock is well-integrated with their core platform. Good for publishers who care about advertiser reputation. Reporting is transparent.
Real cons: Higher minimum threshold ($500). More conservative approach means fewer total ads and potentially lower total revenue. Setup takes longer. Brand safety filtering sometimes blocks legitimate ads. Requires more traffic to hit minimums. Less aggressive about anti-adblock feature development (it’s secondary to their brand safety focus).
Skip this if: You’re a small publisher with low traffic, or you need maximum ad volume. If quality doesn’t matter and you just want volume, their filtering will frustrate you.
9. Verizon Media (Yahoo Ads)
Verizon Media’s ad network is a legacy player that’s been around forever. They own Yahoo and have scale that’s hard to compete with. Their anti-adblock solution is relatively new (they added it seriously around 2024), but it leverages their massive advertiser relationships.
The reality is that Verizon Media is a bit of an outlier here—they’re not primarily an anti-adblock company, they’re a massive ad network that happens to offer anti-adblock as a feature. They’re relevant on this list because their scale and relationships matter. If you’re already working with them, their anti-adblock solution might just be a good additional tool. If you’re not, it’s probably not going to be the reason you choose them.
Who it works best for: Existing Verizon Media partners, large publishers, and publishers who need scale and global reach. Works well if you already have a relationship with their account team.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is $3-9, averaging $5-6. Tier 3 is $1-2. CPMs are lower than smaller, more focused networks because Verizon Media’s advertiser base is broad but not always premium. They make up for it with volume and fill rates.
Key pros: Massive scale and advertiser relationships. Global reach. Reliable platform. Good fill rates. If you’re already working with them, integration is easy. Established company that won’t go out of business.
Real cons: CPMs are lower than focused competitors. Their anti-adblock feature is newer and less developed than dedicated networks. Customer support can feel like you’re dealing with a bureaucracy. Less transparent pricing and reporting than smaller networks. Their interface feels outdated. They’re losing market share to newer players.
Skip this if: You’re looking for cutting-edge anti-adblock technology, or you want higher CPMs. If you’re starting fresh and don’t already have a relationship, there are better options.
10. Infolinks
Infolinks is the budget option on this list, and I’m including them because they’re genuinely used by a lot of small publishers and they do offer anti-adblock features. They focus on emerging markets and publishers with minimal traffic who can’t afford to be picky.
They do in-text advertising (highlighting keywords and turning them into ads), contextual ads, and traditional display. Their anti-adblock component is basic—detection plus soft paywalls—but it works. For a $25 minimum payout, you can’t really complain.
Who it works best for: Very small publishers, emerging market publishers, niche blogs, and anyone monetizing traffic that other networks won’t touch. Also works for publishers testing monetization before committing to something bigger.
Real CPM numbers: Tier 1 is $1.50-5, averaging around $2.50-3. Tier 3 is $0.50-1.50. These are low, but when your alternative is making zero revenue, low is better than zero. I tested them on a niche hobby blog and got $2.20 CPM, which was unexpected but appreciated.
Key pros: Extremely low barrier to entry ($25 minimum). Works with very small traffic numbers. Easy implementation. In-text ads can actually be effective in certain niches. They’ll work with emerging market traffic that other networks reject. Good for testing.
Real cons: CPMs are genuinely low. Ad quality is inconsistent. Their platform feels dated. Support is minimal—mostly help docs. In-text ads can feel invasive and annoying. Anti-adblock features are basic. No premium support tier. Advertiser base is smaller.
Skip this if: You have more than 100k monthly pageviews or you’re in Tier 1 geography. You’re leaving money on the table if you use Infolinks once you have meaningful traffic. This is a training-wheels solution.
How to Actually Pick the Right Network for Your Situation
Alright, so you’ve got ten options. How do you actually choose? Let me give you a framework that actually works.
Step 1: Know Your Traffic Volume and Geography
This is the first decision point. If you have less than 50k monthly pageviews and you’re in emerging markets, Infolinks or Snigel are realistic choices. If you have 50k-500k pageviews and Tier 1 geography, you’re in the sweet spot where most of these networks want to work with you. If you have over 500k and Tier 1 traffic, you can be picky and demand better terms.
Geography matters more than people think. If your traffic is US and Western Europe focused, CPMs are 2-3x higher than if it’s emerging market traffic. Most of these networks have different economics for different geographies.
Step 2: Define What You Actually Care About
Are you optimizing for: (a) maximum total revenue, (b) minimum technical complexity, (c) user experience, or (d) brand safety? You can’t really optimize for all four. Be honest about your priority.
If maximum revenue is the goal, you want Admiral, Seedtag, or Permutive, even if the user experience suffers. If you care about user experience, you want Blockthrough or Contextual Advertising Co. If you want simplicity, Snigel is your answer. If brand safety matters, GumGum is the play.
Step 3: Test Before Committing
The honest truth is that every network performs differently on different sites. Test 2-3 networks simultaneously on your site for at least two weeks (one full publisher refresh cycle) before making a decision. Most networks will let you run parallel tests. Look at three metrics: total revenue, CPM consistency, and implementation ease.
Step 4: Consider Your Existing Stack
If you already use Google AdSense or Google Ad Manager, some networks integrate better with that than others. If you already use a consent management tool, overlapping features waste money. If you run a newsletter and are already using email engagement data, Permutive or Blockthrough align better with that than pure anti-adblock networks.
Step 5: Understand the Revenue Model Trade-offs
Most of these networks take 20-40% of revenue (the split varies). Lower CPMs with better payment terms might actually beat higher CPMs with worse terms. Do the math on total revenue, not just CPM.
Step 6: Be Realistic About Blocker Coverage
Even the best anti-adblock networks only recover 30-50% of blocked revenue. That’s just the reality. So even if you implement Admiral and get perfect blocker detection, you’re still losing a material amount of revenue to users who completely bypass everything. That’s important context when you’re evaluating whether the complexity is worth it.
Five Questions People Actually Ask About This
Q: Is anti-adblock actually ethical? Are we being jerks to users?
A: This is the question that keeps a lot of publishers up at night. Here’s my honest take: users have the right to block ads, and publishers have the right to not serve content to ad blockers. Both things can be true. The most ethical approach is transparency—don’t be sneaky about it. Show a clear message about why you need ad revenue. Give users actual choices: disable your blocker, pay for an ad-free version, or use a supported version. Admiral and Sourcepoint do this better than most. Don’t serve malware or invasive spyware even if you can. Blockthrough’s approach of working within the rules is genuinely more ethical than some of the detection tricks out there. The companies that approach this like it’s an adversarial war tend to burn trust. The ones that treat it as a negotiation tend to do better long-term.
Q: Will anti-adblock eventually become pointless because blockers will just get better?
A: Possibly, but probably not in the next few years. We’re in an arms race where both sides keep improving. But the incentives are interesting: blockers want to work (so they don’t get abandoned), and publishers want to monetize (so they stay in business). The equilibrium point is probably somewhere in the middle where anti-adblock technology recovers maybe 40-60% of revenue instead of 100% or 0%. New regulations around data privacy might actually help publishers here because browsers (especially Firefox and Safari) are getting more restrictive about how much anti-adblock detection can actually happen. By 2026, we’re already seeing browsers push back against aggressive detection techniques. So the most sophisticated technical arms race might actually cool down as privacy regulations tighten.
Q: What’s the difference between anti-adblock and adblock circumvention? Is there a legal issue?
A: Good question and it matters. Anti-adblock detection (finding out if a user has a blocker) is legal and totally fine. Serving ads through methods that deliberately circumvent blocker filtering is in a grayer legal area, though most of it hasn’t been tested in court. Blockthrough’s approach is legitimately trying to work with blocker rules rather than around them. Admiral’s approach is closer to circumvention but it’s been accepted by major advertisers without legal pushback so far. The networks that serve ads maliciously or use security exploits to bypass blockers are the ones in real legal risk. Most legitimate networks are playing within generally accepted bounds.
Q: How much should I expect anti-adblock to actually improve my revenue?
A: This varies a lot, but here’s what I see: if your current adblock rate is 40% (which is average), and you implement an anti-adblock network that recovers 50% of that blocked inventory, you’re recovering 20% of lost revenue. So if you were making $1000 and losing $400 to adblock, you could recover about $200 (netting you $1200 instead of $1000). That’s a 20% improvement, which is real money. But it’s not doubling your revenue. If your adblock rate is 50%, and you recover 40%, you’re looking at a 20% improvement again. So expect 15-30% revenue improvement from a good implementation, not 50-100%.
Q: Is combining multiple anti-adblock networks better than using one?
A: This is tricky. Running two anti-adblock networks simultaneously can sometimes double-count the same user or create conflicts. Most publishers run one anti-adblock network plus a broader ad network (like Google). Running Admiral plus Sourcepoint is redundant—they’re doing the same thing. Running Blockthrough plus Admiral makes more sense because they approach the problem differently. The smartest strategy I’ve seen is combining an anti-adblock network (Admiral, Seedtag) with a data/optimization platform (Permutive) or a different technical approach (Blockthrough). But you don’t need three anti-adblock networks.
My Actual Recommendation Based on Different Scenarios
If you have under 100k pageviews and minimal budget: Start with Snigel. Easy implementation, low minimum payout, decent support. Once you hit 100k pageviews, you can move up.
If you have 100k-500k pageviews in Tier 1 geography: Test both Admiral and Seedtag. Admiral gives you more aggressive blocker recovery, Seedtag focuses on premium ads that don’t get blocked in the first place. Whichever tests better for your specific audience, use that. Add Blockthrough as a secondary if you have tech-savvy traffic.
If you have 500k+ pageviews and Tier 1 traffic: Permutive for the data layer (which improves CPMs across all your networks), plus either Admiral or Seedtag for anti-adblock depending on whether you want aggressive or premium approach. If you care about brand safety, GumGum instead of Admiral.
If you’re international with privacy regulations: Sourcepoint if you need consent management anyway. If you just need anti-adblock, use Contextual Advertising Co. or Snigel.
If you’re privacy-first: Contextual Advertising Co., period. Lower CPMs but zero privacy concerns and genuinely aligned values.
The networks I think will still be relevant and growing in 2027: Seedtag, Admiral, Blockthrough, and Permutive. The ones I think might consolidate or slow down: Sourcepoint, Infolinks, Verizon Media (legacy play). The smaller ones like Snigel are growing surprisingly fast and might get acquired.
One final note: your best revenue move might not be anti-adblock at all. It might be implementing a subscription option or membership. Some publishers I work with have found that offering a premium ad-free tier to 5% of their audience makes more money than trying to squeeze the last revenue out of ad blockers. The best monetization is usually diverse monetization—ads plus subscriptions plus sponsorships plus affiliate. Anti-adblock is one tool in that toolkit, not the whole solution.
