We're not wedded to it, but it's definitely given us what we've needed
In the daily work of placing digital advertisements, thirteen media buyers have offered a rare collective portrait of the tools they depend on — and the compromises they accept. Across five major platforms, no single technology earns unqualified trust: each excels in one dimension while falling short in another, leaving buyers to assemble their own patchwork of instruments. The assessment, gathered by Digiday in mid-2026, reflects a broader truth about mature technology markets — that dominance and satisfaction are not the same thing, and that the most-used tool is not always the most beloved.
- Google's DV360 commands over a fifth of all open web display spending not because buyers love it, but because walking away from YouTube means walking away from the money.
- The Trade Desk, long the sophisticated buyer's platform of choice, is absorbing real damage — an earnings miss, a poorly received product overhaul, and a public fight with one of advertising's largest holding companies.
- Amazon is moving aggressively on price and data, leveraging its unmatched knowledge of consumer purchasing behavior to pull spending away from established rivals.
- Yahoo has quietly rebuilt itself around AI-driven planning tools, winning praise for transparent pricing and targeting flexibility that larger platforms don't offer at comparable cost.
- StackAdapt earns the highest marks for customer service and interface design but remains a specialist's tool — brought in for specific campaigns rather than anchoring any buyer's core strategy.
- The market is fragmenting rather than consolidating, forcing buyers to maintain fluency across multiple platforms and leaving open the question of whether any challenger can grow from occasional alternative to essential infrastructure.
The people who buy digital ads for a living don't follow corporate drama — they follow CPM rates, data visibility, and audience reach. Thirteen media buyers at agencies of varying sizes spoke with Digiday about the five DSPs they use most, and what emerged was a portrait of a market in flux: no platform winning decisively, each strong in some dimension and weak in another.
Google's DV360 is the unavoidable giant. It captures more than a fifth of all open web display spending, a dominance rooted almost entirely in YouTube. Buyers don't love it — they cite opacity, unresponsive sales teams, and a sense that Google withholds its best capabilities. But they use it anyway. It scored 7 out of 10 overall, with transparency at just 6.5 and customer service at 5.2, yet inventory access and data quality both reached 7.9. The relationship is one of necessity rather than loyalty.
The Trade Desk has long been the independent alternative for buyers who want depth and control. It still leads on transparency at 8.8 and inventory breadth, but the past eighteen months have been difficult — an earnings miss, user frustration with its Kokai product redesign, and a public dispute with holding company Publicis Groupe have all left marks. Buyers describe it as expensive, like choosing a Lexus when a Toyota would do, and its price performance rating fell to 5.8. Overall score: 7.2.
Amazon is the insurgent. It redesigned its DSP last year and has been offering aggressive pricing to pull spending from competitors. Its real weapon is data — knowing what people actually buy and using that to target shoppers across streaming and the open web. For clients who sell through Amazon, this is invaluable. Its overall score of 6.1 is the lowest of the five, but that number obscures its appeal to a specific and growing slice of the market.
Yahoo was nearly written off, but has made a quiet comeback through early investment in AI-powered and agentic planning tools. Buyers praise its targeting flexibility and transparent pricing — one noted the ability to build custom audiences at no added cost. It scored 7.3 overall, with strong marks on data and customer service. It is a platform worth watching as automation reshapes the industry.
StackAdapt is the scrappy challenger, recently securing the first DSP access to ChatGPT inventory through a deal with OpenAI. It can't compete on owned assets, but it earned the highest customer service and UX scores of any platform at 8.1. Its flat CPM billing is simple, though buyers ultimately rank transparency and cost above ease of use, and its price performance came in at just 6 out of 10. For now, it's a specialist's tool rather than a core platform.
What the rankings reveal is a market where buyers are forced to be pragmatists — reaching for DV360 for YouTube, The Trade Desk for control, Amazon for commerce data, Yahoo for AI capabilities, and StackAdapt for specific campaigns. The era of one DSP doing everything is over. Whether the smaller players can build enough distinctive value to become essential, or whether the market eventually consolidates, remains the defining question ahead.
The people who actually buy digital ads for a living don't care much about the corporate drama. They care about CPM rates, whether they can see the data flowing through a platform, and whether they can reach the audiences their clients need to reach. Thirteen media buyers at agencies large and small sat down with Digiday to talk about the five DSPs they use most: Google's DV360, The Trade Desk, Amazon, Yahoo, and StackAdapt. What emerged was a portrait of a market in flux—no single platform winning decisively, each one strong in some dimension and weak in another, and buyers forced to juggle multiple tools to get the job done.
Google's DV360 is the elephant in the room. Over one-fifth of all spending on open web display advertising flows through it, a dominance rooted in one simple fact: it controls YouTube, and YouTube is where the money goes. Buyers don't love it. They complain about opacity, about sales teams that stonewall requests, about the sense that Google keeps its best cards close. But they use it anyway, because the alternative is leaving money on the table. One buyer described it as "a good all-rounder… without being overly complex and overly expensive," which is the kind of backhanded compliment that defines the relationship. Another said, "We're not wedded to it, but it's definitely given us what we've needed over the years." DV360 scored a 7 out of 10 overall—respectable but not beloved. Its transparency rating was particularly weak at 6.5 out of 10, and customer service came in at just 5.2. But inventory access and data quality both hit 7.9, and that's because YouTube matters.
The Trade Desk has long been the independent alternative, the platform that buyers turn to when they want depth, control, and access to inventory beyond Google's walled garden. It offers streaming, commerce partnerships with retailers like Walmart, and niche sources like Spotify. For years it was the obvious choice for sophisticated buyers who wanted to see every lever and pull every knob. But the last eighteen months have been rough. An earnings miss, user backlash over a product called Kokai, and a public boardroom fight with holding company Publicis Groupe have all taken their toll. One buyer said of Kokai: "I'm not a Kokai fan… it frustrates me." The Trade Desk still scores highest on transparency at 8.8 out of 10 and inventory access at 8.8, but its price performance rating dropped to 5.8—buyers see it as expensive, "like driving a Lexus rather than a Toyota," as one put it. The company has begun introducing different usage modes to appeal to less experienced staffers who don't need every feature available. Overall score: 7.2 out of 10.
Amazon is the insurgent, moving aggressively into territory The Trade Desk has long owned. The company redesigned its DSP last year and has been offering cut-rate deals to lure spending away from competitors. Its real advantage isn't price, though—it's data. Amazon knows what people buy, and it can use that information to target shoppers across streaming platforms and the open web. It's been building relationships with Netflix and has developed a sports portfolio on Prime Video. For clients who sell through Amazon, this is invaluable. One buyer said: "The Amazon ecosystem is very important for some of our clients as well because it's where they sell direct." Amazon's overall score was 6.1 out of 10, the lowest of the five, but that number masks its appeal to a specific slice of the market. Its transparency rating was weak at 5.7, and customer service came in at 4.8, but for the right client, those weaknesses don't matter.
Yahoo's DSP was written off as acquisition bait not long ago, but the company has made a quiet comeback by investing in AI-powered tools. It was among the first to build out agentic media planning capabilities, turning itself from a display specialist into something more ambitious. It can't match Amazon or Google on owned inventory, but buyers praise its targeting options and pricing. One said: "The ability to do custom intent, custom affinity, and really unique audiences, and at no cost is amazing." Another noted: "They're transparent, they're not tacking on a bunch of fees." Yahoo scored 7.3 overall, with particularly strong marks on data and targeting at 7.9 and customer service at 7.4. It's a platform worth watching as the market becomes more automated and more competitive.
StackAdapt is the scrappy challenger, trying to carve out space in a market dominated by giants with exclusive inventory. It recently made a deal with OpenAI to become the first DSP with access to ChatGPT inventory. It can't compete on owned assets, but it's won fans for its intuitive interface and responsive support—it scored 8.1 out of 10 on customer service and user experience, the highest of any platform. Its billing is straightforward, a flat CPM that makes accounting simple if less transparent. But buyers rank cost and transparency above ease of use, and StackAdapt's price performance came in at just 6 out of 10. One buyer gave it a four. For now, it's a substitute player, brought in for specific campaigns rather than a core part of the rotation. Overall score: 6.6 out of 10.
What the rankings reveal is a market where no single platform dominates across all dimensions. Buyers are forced to be pragmatists, choosing different tools for different jobs. They need DV360 for YouTube, The Trade Desk for control and depth, Amazon for commerce, Yahoo for emerging AI capabilities, and StackAdapt for specific use cases. The days when one DSP could do everything are over. The question now is whether the smaller players can build enough distinctive value to become more than occasional alternatives, or whether the market will eventually consolidate around a smaller number of dominant platforms.
Citas Notables
It's a good all-rounder without being overly complex and overly expensive— Media buyer on DV360
It's like driving a Lexus rather than a Toyota— Media buyer on The Trade Desk's pricing
The Amazon ecosystem is very important for some of our clients because it's where they sell direct— Media buyer on Amazon DSP's commerce advantage
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why does Google's DV360 score so low on customer service if it's so essential?
Because Google doesn't have to try. When you control YouTube, buyers come to you whether you're responsive or not. They're not happy about it, but they show up.
So The Trade Desk's troubles are real—the Kokai backlash, the Publicis fight. Are buyers actually leaving?
Not wholesale, but they're hedging. The Trade Desk still offers the most sophisticated tooling, but buyers are testing Amazon and Yahoo more seriously now. The company's stumbles opened a door.
Amazon's score is the lowest overall, yet you describe it as an insurgent. How does that work?
Because the overall score masks what matters to specific buyers. If you're selling through Amazon, their commerce data is worth more than a higher score on transparency. The ranking assumes all buyers value the same things equally, but they don't.
Yahoo was supposed to be dead. What changed?
They invested in AI tools early and they're transparent about pricing. They're not trying to be everything to everyone. They're building something specific, and buyers notice when a company does that.
StackAdapt has the best customer service rating but the worst price performance. Is that a fatal flaw?
For now, yes. Buyers will tolerate bad service if the price is right, but they won't tolerate bad pricing for good service. StackAdapt is useful for specific campaigns, not core strategy.
What does this market look like in two years?
Probably more fragmented, not less. Buyers are getting comfortable managing multiple platforms. The idea that one DSP does everything is dead.