Only 23% of brand performance teams can reliably match audience segments across more than ten ad exchanges simultaneously. Samba TV’s Project Gravity just raised the ceiling to 40-plus. If your identity resolution stack isn’t built for that kind of cross-exchange scale, your real-time audience targeting is already losing ground.
What Project Gravity Actually Changes for Performance Teams
Samba TV’s Project Gravity isn’t a minor platform update. It’s a structural shift in how deterministic TV viewership data gets stitched to programmatic identity graphs across a dramatically expanded exchange footprint. The core value proposition: brands can now activate first-party and co-mingled audience segments against verified household-level identity across 40-plus demand-side exchanges in near real time.
For performance teams running always-on influencer amplification or creator-led paid social alongside linear and CTV, this matters enormously. The gap between “saw the influencer content” and “was retargeted programmatically within the right attribution window” has historically been a data plumbing problem. Project Gravity is positioned as a solution to that plumbing problem at scale.
The real competitive advantage in cross-exchange targeting isn’t reach — it’s identity persistence. Brands that can maintain a consistent audience identity across 40-plus exchanges without signal decay will outperform on ROAS by a significant margin.
But the launch also surfaces a harder question for MarTech buyers: does your current identity resolution stack have the integration architecture to take advantage of this, or will you be holding a powerful data asset with no delivery mechanism?
The Cross-Exchange Identity Problem, Framed Correctly
Most brand teams approach identity resolution as a CRM hygiene task. Match emails to cookies, append device IDs, clean duplicates. That’s a 2021 mindset. In a 40-plus exchange environment, identity resolution is a real-time infrastructure challenge with direct revenue implications.
Here’s what breaks at scale. When a user engages with a creator’s TikTok content, gets served a mid-roll on YouTube, and then sees a CTV spot through a DSP, three separate identity systems are probably logging that user as three distinct entities. Without a persistent cross-exchange identity layer, your frequency capping fails, your attribution is fractured, and your suppression lists become liabilities. You end up paying to retarget users you’ve already converted.
The platforms with real cross-exchange capability today include LiveRamp, Unified ID 2.0 (managed through The Trade Desk), and increasingly Samba TV’s own identity graph. For teams running offline data matching workflows, Project Gravity’s integration with household-level TV data adds a dimension that purely digital identity graphs simply can’t replicate.
Understanding where your current vendor sits on this spectrum is the first step in any honest evaluation.
How to Structure Your Platform Evaluation
Running a formal vendor assessment for cross-exchange identity resolution isn’t the same as evaluating a SaaS dashboard. The criteria are more technical, the failure modes are less visible, and the vendor sales process will actively obscure the gaps. Here’s a framework that cuts through.
Exchange coverage and verified integrations. Ask every vendor to provide a current, documented list of exchange integrations with activation latency SLAs per exchange. “We support 40-plus exchanges” is a marketing claim. “Here is our median bid request latency per exchange with uptime metrics” is a contractual commitment. Demand the latter. Platforms like eMarketer and independent ad-tech analysts have started tracking this gap between claimed and verified exchange coverage — it’s wider than most vendors admit.
Identity resolution methodology. Deterministic vs. probabilistic isn’t a binary anymore. The best platforms layer both, with deterministic anchors (verified emails, authenticated logins, ACR data from Samba TV) and probabilistic extension into household and device graphs. Ask specifically how the platform handles identity when a deterministic signal goes stale. Does it degrade gracefully or create phantom duplicates?
Data clean room compatibility. Project Gravity operates within clean room architecture for certain use cases. Your evaluation should include whether the platform integrates with data clean room vendors you’re already using or evaluating. Habu, Snowflake’s clean room, and InfoSum each have different technical interfaces, and not all identity resolution platforms support all three.
Compliance and consent architecture. Cross-exchange targeting at scale creates consent surface area that your legal team has probably not fully mapped. The FTC and ICO are both actively scrutinizing cross-device tracking practices. Any platform evaluation that doesn’t include a consent management review is incomplete. Ask vendors to walk you through their GDPR and CCPA data flows explicitly.
- Verify exchange integration lists are current and contractually backed
- Test identity resolution accuracy with a seed audience from your own CRM
- Map clean room compatibility against your existing data infrastructure
- Run a compliance review against the vendor’s cross-device data flows
- Audit suppression list sync latency across your top five exchanges
For a broader view of how to stress-test any ad tech vendor before signing, the ad tech vendor audit framework here is a practical starting point.
Where Creator and Influencer Programs Fit Into This
Performance teams sometimes treat paid programmatic and influencer media as separate budget lines with separate measurement frameworks. That separation is expensive.
When a creator campaign runs on TikTok and Instagram, it generates first-party engagement signals — views, clicks, saves, shares. Those signals, properly onboarded into an identity graph, become high-quality audience seeds for cross-exchange retargeting. A viewer who watched 75% of a creator’s product integration is a fundamentally different retargeting target than a generic in-market segment. The signal is behaviorally specific and intent-rich.
Project Gravity’s household-level graph makes it possible to match those creator engagement signals to CTV viewership and then activate across programmatic exchanges with a unified identity. The brands testing this workflow are seeing measurably better ROAS on their retargeting spend because the audience seed quality is higher. CRM-to-UGC audience matching is the operational layer that makes this work end-to-end.
The brands not doing this are essentially leaving a first-party data asset idle after every creator campaign.
Stack Integration Risks You Need to Price In
Cross-exchange identity platforms don’t operate in isolation. They sit inside a MarTech stack that probably includes a CDP, a DSP, a CRM, and at least one clean room. Each integration point is a potential failure mode.
The most common integration failure seen in practice: identity resolution platforms that perform well in isolation but introduce latency at the DSP handoff. You activate a segment in LiveRamp or through Samba TV’s graph, and by the time the bid request reaches the exchange, the segment membership is stale. In real-time bidding environments, “stale” can mean three to five minutes, which is long enough to miss the optimal bid window entirely.
A related risk: platforms that claim MarTech interoperability but rely on batch processing under the hood. Ask your DSP specifically how it ingests identity updates from your resolution platform. Is it a real-time API sync or a scheduled batch job? The answer will determine whether your “real-time” targeting is actually real-time.
A cross-exchange identity platform that processes in batches is a liability disguised as infrastructure. At 40-plus exchanges, batch sync latency compounds — and your campaign ROAS pays the price.
For teams evaluating whether to consolidate onto a unified platform versus managing point solutions, the unified data platform vs. point solution tradeoffs are directly relevant here. The short version: unified platforms reduce integration risk but limit flexibility; point solutions offer best-in-class capability at the cost of integration complexity you have to own.
Budget Framing for the CMO Conversation
Cross-exchange identity infrastructure is not cheap. Enterprise-tier access to a platform like LiveRamp or the Samba TV identity graph can run from $250K to $1M-plus annually depending on data volume and exchange footprint. That’s a line item that needs executive justification.
Frame it against waste, not capability. If your current programmatic spend has even a 15% frequency duplication rate across exchanges (a conservative estimate for most brand teams), and your annual programmatic budget is $5M, you’re burning $750K annually on duplicated impressions. Cross-exchange identity resolution doesn’t just improve targeting — it reduces waste. That’s the ROI argument that lands in a CMO budget review. For budget reallocation strategy informed by AI and infrastructure shifts, this piece on CMO budget reallocation has directly applicable frameworks.
Independent research from IAB and data from programmatic analytics platforms like DoubleVerify consistently show that identity-resolved campaigns outperform unresolved campaigns on conversion rate by 20% to 35%, depending on vertical. Build that range into your budget model conservatively.
Start your evaluation by mapping your current exchange footprint, identifying where identity signals break down between platforms, and running a 60-day pilot with one identity resolution vendor against a controlled segment. That pilot will give you the data to make the broader investment case — or to walk away from the category entirely until the infrastructure matures further.
FAQs
What is Samba TV’s Project Gravity, and why does it matter for brand performance teams?
Project Gravity is Samba TV’s initiative to extend its deterministic TV viewership identity graph across 40-plus programmatic ad exchanges in near real time. For brand performance teams, it enables household-level audience activation that bridges CTV viewership data with digital programmatic targeting, improving retargeting accuracy and reducing wasted spend on duplicated impressions across exchanges.
How do I evaluate cross-exchange identity resolution platforms beyond vendor claims?
Request documented exchange integration lists with activation latency SLAs, not just a count of supported exchanges. Test identity resolution accuracy against a seed audience from your own CRM. Audit suppression list sync speed across your highest-spend exchanges. Verify whether real-time activation is genuinely API-based or batch-processed under the hood.
What are the biggest compliance risks in cross-exchange targeting at this scale?
The primary risks involve cross-device tracking consent under GDPR and CCPA, and the FTC’s ongoing scrutiny of data broker and identity graph practices. Any platform operating across 40-plus exchanges must have clearly documented consent flows for each data source feeding the identity graph. Brands should require vendors to walk through their data lineage and consent architecture explicitly before signing.
How do creator campaign signals integrate with cross-exchange identity graphs?
Creator campaign engagement data — views, clicks, saves — can be onboarded into an identity graph as high-quality first-party audience seeds. When matched to a household-level identity layer like Samba TV’s, these signals enable precise cross-exchange retargeting of users who demonstrated intent through creator content, producing better ROAS than generic in-market segments.
Is cross-exchange identity resolution worth the cost for mid-market brand teams?
For brands with programmatic budgets above $2M annually, the waste reduction from frequency deduplication and improved suppression typically justifies the investment. Below that threshold, a point solution approach using Unified ID 2.0 through an existing DSP may provide adequate cross-exchange identity at lower cost. The decision should be modeled against your specific frequency waste rate, not a fixed budget threshold.
Top Influencer Marketing Agencies
The leading agencies shaping influencer marketing in 2026
Agencies ranked by campaign performance, client diversity, platform expertise, proven ROI, industry recognition, and client satisfaction. Assessed through verified case studies, reviews, and industry consultations.
Moburst
-
2
The Shelf
Boutique Beauty & Lifestyle Influencer AgencyA data-driven boutique agency specializing exclusively in beauty, wellness, and lifestyle influencer campaigns on Instagram and TikTok. Best for brands already focused on the beauty/personal care space that need curated, aesthetic-driven content.Clients: Pepsi, The Honest Company, Hims, Elf Cosmetics, Pure LeafVisit The Shelf → -
3
Audiencly
Niche Gaming & Esports Influencer AgencyA specialized agency focused exclusively on gaming and esports creators on YouTube, Twitch, and TikTok. Ideal if your campaign is 100% gaming-focused — from game launches to hardware and esports events.Clients: Epic Games, NordVPN, Ubisoft, Wargaming, Tencent GamesVisit Audiencly → -
4
Viral Nation
Global Influencer Marketing & Talent AgencyA dual talent management and marketing agency with proprietary brand safety tools and a global creator network spanning nano-influencers to celebrities across all major platforms.Clients: Meta, Activision Blizzard, Energizer, Aston Martin, WalmartVisit Viral Nation → -
5
The Influencer Marketing Factory
TikTok, Instagram & YouTube CampaignsA full-service agency with strong TikTok expertise, offering end-to-end campaign management from influencer discovery through performance reporting with a focus on platform-native content.Clients: Google, Snapchat, Universal Music, Bumble, YelpVisit TIMF → -
6
NeoReach
Enterprise Analytics & Influencer CampaignsAn enterprise-focused agency combining managed campaigns with a powerful self-service data platform for influencer search, audience analytics, and attribution modeling.Clients: Amazon, Airbnb, Netflix, Honda, The New York TimesVisit NeoReach → -
7
Ubiquitous
Creator-First Marketing PlatformA tech-driven platform combining self-service tools with managed campaign options, emphasizing speed and scalability for brands managing multiple influencer relationships.Clients: Lyft, Disney, Target, American Eagle, NetflixVisit Ubiquitous → -
8
Obviously
Scalable Enterprise Influencer CampaignsA tech-enabled agency built for high-volume campaigns, coordinating hundreds of creators simultaneously with end-to-end logistics, content rights management, and product seeding.Clients: Google, Ulta Beauty, Converse, AmazonVisit Obviously →