- In the campaign month, the brand’s network drew 34.1% more visits than its average over the previous 12 months, which stood at 154.2k a month.
- The four competitors’ networks grew between 1.9% and 8.2% in the same month, and the brand finished 26 points above even the fastest grower.
- In the same 13 cities, the brand’s vehicle registrations rose 21.7%, according to official Senatran data.
One visit, many owners
Anyone who has sat through a results meeting for an automotive campaign knows the scene. The display platform presents the dealership visits it attributes to its ads, the CTV partner shows its own number, the OOH vendor brings another, and social adds one more. Because each report measures visits from its own delivery, the same person who walked into the showroom on a Saturday afternoon can show up in every one of them.
The confusion comes from the way the plan itself works. An automotive campaign runs display, CTV, OOH, DOOH, retail media and social at the same time, and the decision to visit a store is shaped by all of them together, plus factors no channel controls, such as a launch, financing terms or the time of year. Even so, the most common metric is still a “post-exposure visit” calculated by a single platform, on its own delivery and without any audit.
No single channel can take credit for the entire media effort. What the advertiser needs to know is how much the whole plan moved.
HYPR designed the measurement in this study around that question. We started from the automaker’s actual dealerships and measured the combined effect of everything on air during the period, without trying to split the credit among channels. The analysis has three layers, and each one corrects a bias the previous one would let through.
- 01Baseline
We compared visits in the campaign month with the brand network’s monthly average over the previous 12 months.
- 02Competition
Over the same period, we measured visits to competitors’ dealerships, because growth only counts if it beats the market.
- 03Registrations
We checked the result against official vehicle registrations from Senatran, Brazil’s national traffic authority, in the same cities and the same month.
All three tests pointed the same way, as the numbers below summarize. The sections that follow explain how each one was run and what it adds to the picture.
Read the full study.
Fill this in once and every study in the Índice HYPR opens for you in this browser. No password, no account.
- First test: the network against its own history
- Second test: the brand against the market
- Third test: from visit to registration
First test: the network against its own history
The starting point is to compare the network with itself. In the 12 months before the flight, the period when the campaign was on air, the brand’s dealerships drew an average of 154.2k visits a month. That average serves as the baseline, a reference for the traffic the network normally sees. In the campaign month, the figure rose 34.1%, or roughly 53k additional visits.
- Campaign month
- Baseline
Baseline: average of the 12 months before the flight. Campaign month: baseline × (1 + 34.1%). Source: geoIQ, powered by Places Graph.
Comparing the network with its own past still leaves a question open. If the campaign month was a good one for the whole industry, part of that growth would have happened anyway. The second test is there to settle it.
Second test: the brand against the market
A strong month for the brand might simply be a strong month for the industry, driven by factors that hit every automaker at once. To tell the two apart, we measured visits to the dealerships of four direct competitors over the same period and with the same method, comparing each network with its own baseline.
Competitors anonymized. Same method and same period for every network. Source: geoIQ, powered by Places Graph.
The market was indeed on the rise. Competitors grew between 1.9% and 8.2%, for an average of 4.7%, a far more moderate pace than the brand’s. Even against the fastest grower, the brand came out about 26 percentage points ahead. That gap is the portion of growth the industry’s own momentum can’t explain, which is why it can be tied to the campaign with much more confidence.
One question remained, the one an automaker cares about most: did the extra visits turn into cars sold?
Third test: from visit to registration
A visit signals purchase intent, and the proof that a campaign reached the sale is a registered car. So the final layer checks the visit lift against official Senatran registrations, in the same 13 cities and the same month.
The brand’s registrations grew 21.7%. That increase is smaller than the rise in visits, which is to be expected, since not every trip to the showroom ends in a purchase within the same month. Still, the two indicators climbed together, and the official data confirms that the traffic geoIQ measured carried through to sales.
For anyone planning automotive media, this design brings back to the results meeting a single number everyone can audit, measured across the whole plan and tied to sales. The three attributes below sum up the method.
- 01Agnostic
It measures the whole plan.
No channel gets to keep the visit. The effect we read adds up every media effort active during the period.
- 02Auditable
Every number has a point of comparison.
The network’s own history and the market’s performance in the same month serve as the counterfactual for the result.
- 03Closed-loop
It ends in a sale.
Official registration data confirms the extra visits turned into cars on the road.