Reviews
Part of How to review media buying agencies for brief fit, not reputation
Media buying agencies product comparison: Google Ads, LinkedIn and Amazon DSP records
Media buying agencies product comparison: what Google Ads, LinkedIn Campaign Manager and Amazon DSP publish on access and reporting for UK buyers.
What to take away
This media buying agencies product comparison sets out what three ad-buying platforms publish on access and reporting, and where each record stops.
- No platform wins this comparison. It judges access and reporting records, not campaign performance.
- Amazon's own page names UK availability. The Google Ads and LinkedIn help records are global, so account permissions decide use for an England-based client.
- Google Ads' cited page concentrates on conversion actions. LinkedIn's covers report exports. Amazon's covers demand-side buying, formats and access.
- Put account ownership and responsibility into one full written statement, then refer back to it in short form.
- Mark each product applicable, conditional or outside scope before signature.
The comparison boundary
Research date: 5 September 2026. Buyer geography: England. Product pages count as global records unless a UK availability statement appears.
A platform qualified if its owner published a live page describing buying access or reporting that a client could verify. Exclusions were error pages, products with no first-party record, third-party summaries and pricing claims without consistent UK units.
This was desk research. Nobody logged in, ran media, exported a report or tested support. No platform paid for or sponsored the page, and a commissioning editor re-checks each cited page before publication.
For how such review criteria get set, the media agency evidence cards separate verified facts from agency claims.
What each record proves, and where it stops
The table uses product documentation rather than an agency's paraphrase. A blank or qualified cell is not a failure score. It marks a question to put to the agency.
| Product record | Officially documented route | Review evidence available | Access and geography | Limit for comparison |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Google Ads conversion tracking | Separate actions for website, app, phone and offline conversions | Conversion setup choices that can be checked against a measurement plan | Global help page; account settings decide use in England | Google's measurement configuration, not independent sales impact |
| LinkedIn Campaign Manager | CSV exports at account, campaign, ad set and ad level | Performance, conversion, Audience Network and professional-demographic report types | Global help record; access depends on ad-account permission | Publisher-side reports do not establish incrementality |
| Amazon DSP | Self-service and managed-service routes for eligible users | Stated reporting across standard and proprietary measures | First-party page names UK availability; some features vary by region | Amazon's own product and audience claims need proposal confirmation |
The three rows describe different functions, so their features cannot be scored as one unit. Google Ads documents conversion configuration. LinkedIn documents report export. Amazon documents buying access, formats and reach.
The four columns are the comparison criteria, applied row by row: officially documented route, review evidence available, access and geography, and limit for comparison. Google Ads documents conversion configuration, LinkedIn documents report export, and Amazon documents buying access, formats and reach, with UK availability named on its own page. Access levels sit inside each product — in Google Ads they run from admin to read-only, and only an existing admin can grant or remove them — so the account map should name the level the agency holds.
Three platforms compared
Google Ads
- Documented route
- Website, app, phone, offline
- Review evidence
- Conversion setup choices
- Access and geography
- Global help page
- Evidence limit
- Not independent sales impact
LinkedIn Campaign Manager
- Documented route
- CSV exports at four levels
- Review evidence
- Performance and conversion reports
- Access and geography
- Global help record
- Evidence limit
- No incrementality outside account
Amazon DSP
- Documented route
- Self-service and managed service
- Review evidence
- Standard and proprietary measures
- Access and geography
- UK availability listed
- Evidence limit
- Claims come from Amazon
Turning the table into a decision
- List the inventory, formats and audiences the plan actually needs.
- Mark each product applicable, conditional or outside scope against that list.
- Ask the agency to resolve every conditional item in writing before signature.
- Recheck availability and account terms, because public product pages change.
- Keep rejected routes and short reasons in the procurement record.
For each product, ask for a screen-shared account map and a written responsibility matrix. It should name who owns the account, who grants permissions, who approves conversion definitions, who retains raw exports and who can remove agency access.
The account map and matrix also feed the wider vendor due diligence file, which covers contracting entity, access and exit.
Example: one conditional item resolved in writing
Take a common conditional item. An agency proposes LinkedIn lead generation and Amazon DSP retargeting. LinkedIn's export covers professional demographics, but nobody has confirmed who holds the ad account.
Resolved in writing, the client's own ad account holds the contract. The agency receives campaign-manager permission. The client keeps raw CSV exports, and agency access ends on the notice period in the contract.
That turns the item from conditional to applicable, and the same wording goes into the contract schedule.
Account questions to put to the agency
The account map and matrix should answer the following points.
- Does the agency's answer match the product record in the table above?
- Which fields are platform-reported, imported, modelled or reconciled to the client's accepted outcome?
- Who can remove agency access, and on what notice?
- Where is the matrix stored, and who updates it?
Questions for the agency
- Request screen-shared account map
- Request written responsibility matrix
- Ask who owns the account
- Ask who grants user permissions
- Ask who approves conversion definitions
- Ask who retains raw exports
- Ask who can remove agency access
If programme-based buying is in scope, the IAB UK programmatic guide sets out roles, auctions, data and supply-chain concepts for a UK audience. It is background reading, not a certification of any product or agency.
Signing follows the commercial contracts checklist, which lists the matters to settle in writing. A buyer can also check the agency's registration, filings and directors at Companies House before signature.
The same questions apply whichever media buying agency is proposed — a large group such as GroupM, Publicis Media, Omnicom Media Group, Dentsu or Havas Media, or an independent UK agency. The platform records above are the fixed evidence; the agency's account map, responsibility matrix and contract schedule are what change, and they belong in writing before signature.
Common questions
These are the questions buyers raise most often once the three records sit beside an agency's proposal.
Does this comparison judge which platform performs best?
No. It looks only at what official public records say about access and reporting, and the products sell different audiences and inventory.
What should the agency provide for each proposed platform?
The account map and matrix described above, set beside the platform's own record. Ask for both before signature.
Do Google Ads and LinkedIn publish UK-specific records?
No. Both help pages are global, and account permissions plus local settings decide what an England-based client can see. The agency should evidence those settings directly.
