Pixalate Unveils US Connected TV (CTV) Seller Trust Index 2.0: First Independent SSP Rankings on Arbitrage vs. Publisher-Direct; Rates 20+ CTV Ad Sellers (SSPs) in Q4 2025
United States Connected TV (CTV) STI 2.0 now rates CTV ad sellers by arbitrage risk and invalid traffic (ad fraud) risk across Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV, Samsung TV, and LG
LONDON, April 02, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Pixalate, an ad fraud and privacy compliance platform, today released the Connected TV (CTV) Seller Trust Index (STI) 2.0. STI 2.0 provides a leap in measurement capability that fully differentiates between arbitraged vs. authorized publisher-direct inventory for 20+ open programmatic CTV ad sellers across Roku, Amazon Fire TV, Apple TV, Samsung TV, and LG in the United States. The index is free, public, and updated quarterly.
Historically, buyers have had no independent way to benchmark which sellers actually deliver direct inventory at scale across platforms, and which add to the “tech tax” as resellers. Supply Path Optimization was supposed to solve this, but buyers have lacked the tools to identify which sellers are primarily reselling inventory (arbitraging).
“Buyers want to be one hop from the publisher at scale,” said Jalal Nasir, CEO of Pixalate. “Now they can see, seller by seller and platform by platform, who actually holds direct publisher relationships and who is adding hops.”
The STI 2.0 gives buyers that data. For each seller in each country, the model measures:
- What Sellers Claim: How many publishers selling ads list the seller as DIRECT in their app-ads.txt file, as detected by Pixalate
- Verification of Seller Claims: The scale and ratio of a seller’s impressions that actually flowed through an authorized-direct path, per Pixalate’s SupplyChain Object (SCO) analysis
-
Seller Arbitrage Risk: Independent Pixalate risk rating for selling >50% of inventory as a reseller, according to Pixalate’s SCO analysis
CTV Seller Trust Index 2.0 Metrics
The following metrics are disclosed for each seller on each platform:
| Metric | Description |
| Arbitraged Inventory Ratio | The percentage of a seller’s measured impressions that did not flow through an authorized-direct path — i.e., the share sold as a reseller or arbitrage intermediary, per Pixalate’s SCO analysis. |
| ‘DIRECT’ Publisher Penetration | The number of apps with open programmatic ad activity, as measured by Pixalate, in a country that lists the seller as a DIRECT partner in their app-ads.txt file — a measure of potential direct access in a given market. |
| SIVT Ratio | Sophisticated Invalid Traffic as a percentage of total impressions, per Pixalate’s MRC-accredited detection. |
| GIVT Ratio | General Invalid Traffic as a percentage of total impressions. Includes known bots, spiders, and other non-human traffic identified through industry-standard filtration lists. |
| Fraudulent Bundle ID Traffic Ratio | The percentage of a seller’s ads sold using likely fraudulent Bundle IDs in the bid stream. |
Seller overall rankings are a composite score based on Arbitraged Inventory Ratio, DIRECT Publisher Penetration, and Authorized-Direct Volume.
CTV Arbitrage by Platform: Percentage of SSPs That Are Primarily Resellers
The following table shows the share of CTV SSPs ranked on the STI 2.0 on each platform that are primarily resellers in the United States — meaning over half of their measured impressions were not delivered through an authorized-direct path, as assessed by Pixalate.
| Platform | # of SSPs Ranked | # of SSPs Ranked With >50% Arbitraged Inventory Ratio | % of SSPs Ranked With >50% Arbitraged Inventory Ratio |
| LG | 6 | 3 | 50% |
| Amazon Fire TV | 16 | 5 | 31% |
| Apple TV | 5 | 1 | 20% |
| Samsung TV | 11 | 2 | 18% |
| Roku | 14 | 2 | 14% |
CTV SSP Reseller Breakdown
The following table shows CTV SSPs sorted by the percentage of platforms on which they operate primarily (>50% of traffic) as a reseller, according to Pixalate’s SCO analysis.
| Seller | # of Platforms Ranked on CTV STI | # of Platforms With >50% Arbitraged Inventory Ratio | % of Platforms With >50% Arbitraged Inventory Ratio |
| Nexxen | 3 | 3 | 100% |
| MobileFuse LLC | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| zMaticoo | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| Elixir Holding Inc | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| Adipolo | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| Adagio | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| Bidinfluence | 1 | 1 | 100% |
| Castify | 4 | 2 | 50% |
| Sovrn | 2 | 1 | 50% |
| Verve | 5 | 1 | 20% |
| Google AdExchange | 5 | 0 | 0% |
| Amagi | 5 | 0 | 0% |
| Adtelligent | 4 | 0 | 0% |
| LG Ads | 3 | 0 | 0% |
| Indicue | 3 | 0 | 0% |
| Undertone | 2 | 0 | 0% |
| Algorix | 2 | 0 | 0% |
| InMobi | 2 | 0 | 0% |
| Applovin | 1 | 0 | 0% |
| Aloha Ads | 1 | 0 | 0% |
| Unity Technologies | 1 | 0 | 0% |
| BeachFront | 1 | 0 | 0% |
| VFR | 1 | 0 | 0% |
| Criteo Commerce Grid | 1 | 0 | 0% |
Q4 2025 CTV Seller Trust Index: Top 5 Sellers by Platform (USA)
The following tables show the top-ranked sellers across platforms on the United States CTV Seller Trust Index for Q4 2025. Full rankings are available at pixalate.com.
Roku
| Rank | Seller | Risks | Arbitraged inventory Ratio | ‘DIRECT’ Publisher Penetration | SIVT Ratio | GIVT Ratio | Fraudulent Bundle ID Traffic Ratio |
| 1 | Google AdExchange | High GIVT | 0% | 1,731 | 19% | 21% | 9% |
| 2 | Verve | High SIVT | < 1% | 1,625 | 28% | < 1% | 9% |
| 3 | BeachFront | 0% | 1,570 | 10% | < 1% | 8% | |
| 4 | Sovrn | 3% | 1,571 | 19% | < 1% | 31% | |
| 5 | Adtelligent | High SIVT | 0% | 1,378 | 39% | < 1% | 6% |
Amazon Fire TV
| Rank | Seller | Risks | Arbitraged inventory Ratio | ‘DIRECT’ Publisher Penetration | SIVT Ratio | GIVT Ratio | Fraudulent Bundle ID Traffic Ratio |
| 1 | Google AdExchange | High SIVT, High GIVT | 0% | 637 | 22% | 10% | 24% |
| 2 | Amagi | High SIVT, High GIVT | 0% | 433 | 49% | 4% | 25% |
| 3 | Applovin | High SIVT | 0% | 480 | 26% | < 1% | 57% |
| 4 | Adtelligent | High SIVT | 0% | 418 | 30% | < 1% | 21% |
| 5 | LG Ads | High SIVT | 0% | 449 | 25% | < 1% | 16% |
Apple TV
| Rank | Seller | Risks | Arbitraged inventory Ratio | ‘DIRECT’ Publisher Penetration | SIVT Ratio | GIVT Ratio | Fraudulent Bundle ID Traffic Ratio |
| 1 | Google AdExchange | 0% | 436 | 12% | < 1% | 8% | |
| 2 | Amagi | High SIVT | 0% | 285 | 31% | < 1% | 57% |
| 3 | Verve | 10% | 386 | 18% | 2% | 59% | |
| 4 | Algorix | 0% | 18 | 19% | < 1% | 91% | |
| 5 | Adipolo | Arbitrage | 100% | 226 | 3% | < 1% | 24% |
Samsung TV
| Rank | Seller | Risks | Arbitraged inventory Ratio | ‘DIRECT’ Publisher Penetration | SIVT Ratio | GIVT Ratio | Fraudulent Bundle ID Traffic Ratio |
| 1 | Verve | High SIVT | 0% | 118 | 31% | < 1% | 31% |
| 2 | Google AdExchange | 0% | 131 | 20% | < 1% | 22% | |
| 3 | Criteo Commerce Grid | 0% | 107 | 18% | < 1% | < 1% | |
| 4 | InMobi | High GIVT | 0% | 81 | 15% | 14% | 66% |
| 5 | Castify | High SIVT | 0% | 45 | 29% | < 1% | 28% |
LG
| Rank | Seller | Risks | Arbitraged inventory Ratio | ‘DIRECT’ Publisher Penetration | SIVT Ratio | GIVT Ratio | Fraudulent Bundle ID Traffic Ratio |
| 1 | Google AdExchange | 0% | 36 | 14% | < 1% | 63% | |
| 2 | Adtelligent | High SIVT | 0% | 15 | 39% | < 1% | 49% |
| 3 | Amagi | 0% | 10 | 19% | < 1% | 38% | |
| 4 | Verve | High SIVT, Arbitrage | 83% | 33 | 31% | < 1% | 39% |
| 5 | Adagio | Arbitrage | 100% | 7 | < 1% | < 1% | 100% |
How to Access the CTV Seller Trust Index
The Pixalate Seller Trust Index ratings are free and open to the public. See the full Q4 2025 CTV Seller Trust Index ratings at pixalate.com.
Pixalate also publishes the Web Seller Trust Index and Mobile Seller Trust Index.
About Pixalate
Pixalate is a global platform specializing in privacy compliance, ad fraud prevention, and digital ad supply chain data intelligence. Founded in 2012 and recognized by UNICEF as a “key innovator” for children’s online privacy, Pixalate is trusted by regulators, data researchers, advertisers, publishers, ad tech platforms, and financial analysts across the Connected TV (CTV), mobile app, and website ecosystems. Pixalate is accredited by the MRC for the detection and filtration of Sophisticated Invalid Traffic (SIVT). pixalate.com
Disclaimer
The content of this press release, and the Seller Trust Indexes (collectively, the “Indexes”), reflect Pixalate’s opinions with respect to factors that Pixalate believes may be useful to the digital media industry. As cited in the Indexes, the ratings and rankings in the Indexes are based on a number of metrics and Pixalate’s opinions regarding the relative performance of each seller with respect to the metrics. The data is derived from buy-side, predominantly open auction, programmatic advertising transactions, as measured by Pixalate. Any references to outside sources in the Indexes and herein should not be construed as endorsements. Pixalate’s opinions are just that, opinions, which means that they are neither facts nor guarantees; and neither this press release nor the Indexes are intended to impugn the standing or reputation of any person, entity or app.
IVT rates and scores derived from each vendor’s own proprietary methods and independent analysis may depict differing results and opinions across measurement providers. Any party’s reliance on Pixalate’s Indexes, rankings, IVT opinions, or related data is entirely at that party’s own risk. Pixalate makes no guarantees, representations, or warranties — express or implied — regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of its opinions or data to any particular purpose or circumstance.
Per the MRC, “‘Fraud’ is not intended to represent fraud as defined in various laws, statutes and ordinances or as conventionally used in U.S. Court or other legal proceedings, but rather a custom definition strictly for advertising measurement purposes. Also per the MRC, “‘Invalid Traffic’ is defined generally as traffic that does not meet certain ad serving quality or completeness criteria, or otherwise does not represent legitimate ad traffic that should be included in measurement counts. Among the reasons why ad traffic may be deemed invalid is it is a result of non-human traffic (spiders, bots, etc.), or activity designed to produce fraudulent traffic.”
press@pixalate.com
Legal Disclaimer:
EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.
