Quality Impressions: What They Are, Why They Matter, and How to Measure Them

If you’ve ever been told a campaign delivered “10 million impressions” and still wondered why business results lagged, you’re not alone. In digital advertising, not all impressions are created equal. The shift today isn’t about counting everything that loads; it’s about counting the impressions that actually had a credible chance to influence a real person—quality impressions.

Key takeaways

• A quality impression is more than “served” or even just “viewable.” It’s viewable, filtered for invalid traffic (human), and shown in brand-safe/suitable contexts aligned to targeting.
• Viewability alone can be gamed by fraud; quality impressions require IVT filtering and safety controls to be credible.
• Quality impressions are the baseline for trustworthy optimization, attribution, and attention metrics—not a guarantee of clicks or conversions.

The definition, in plain English

A quality impression is an ad exposure that a real person could actually see, in the right place, under conditions acceptable to your brand. Practically, it bundles three things:

1. Viewability: The ad met industry visibility thresholds (e.g., 50% of pixels in view for at least 1 continuous second for display; 2 seconds for video).
2. Invalid Traffic (IVT) filtration: Known bots and sophisticated fraud were removed so counts reflect human exposure.
3. Brand safety and suitability (with targeting compliance): The placement avoided unsafe content and matched your brand’s suitability policy and targeting rules (like geography).

These foundations are codified in industry standards. For example, the IAB/MRC viewability baseline—“50% of pixels in view for ≥1s for display and ≥2s for video”—is documented across the IAB’s hub for the MRC Viewable Impression guidelines and reiterated in the IAB’s 2024 retail media guidance, which also stresses transparency about IVT treatment and exclusions. See the statements of the thresholds in the IAB’s cross-domain guidance and the hub for the MRC viewable guidelines for details.

• The viewability thresholds are summarized in the IAB’s cross-domain document, where the guidance notes “50% of pixels for 1s (display) and 2s (video).” Refer to the IAB’s Retail Media Measurement Guidelines (2024) and to the MRC Viewable Impression Guidelines hub for the baseline.
• Fraud/IVT detection and disclosure requirements are specified in MRC standards, including the IVT Addendum and subsequent updates. The IAB/MRC retail media explainer (2024) also underscores the need to disclose IVT methodology and reporting exclusions.

Authoritative references:

• The fact that “a viewable impression requires at least 50% of pixels in view for a minimum of 1 second for display and 2 seconds for video” is codified in the IAB’s cross-domain retail media guidance and the MRC viewable guidelines hub.
• The requirement to filter invalid traffic and disclose methodology appears across IAB/MRC materials, such as the IAB/MRC retail media explainer (2024) and the MRC IVT standards addendum (updated 2020).

From served to viewable to quality: the hierarchy

Think of impressions like foot traffic around a storefront:

• Served impression = a person walked past your block—but maybe never looked at your window.
• Viewable impression = your window display was actually within their field of view for at least a moment.
• Quality impression = a real person saw it, in the right neighborhood, without anything compromising your brand standards.

Quick comparison

For the visibility thresholds and measurement disclosures, consult the IAB’s viewability hub for the MRC guidelines, and the IAB Retail Media Measurement Guidelines (2024), which emphasize viewability, IVT treatment, and transparent reporting.

The components of a quality impression

• Invalid Traffic (IVT) filtration: Remove both General IVT (e.g., known data-center traffic, crawlers) and address Sophisticated IVT (e.g., hijacked devices, domain spoofing) where feasible. The MRC IVT standards detail these patterns and the disclosures required in reporting.
• Viewability: Meet or exceed MRC thresholds. For special formats (e.g., AR, in-game, CTV/SSAI), refer to format-specific guidance to ensure the viewability concept is appropriately applied in those environments.
• Brand safety and suitability: Go beyond generic safety to align with your policy. While the WFA has ended the formal GARM program (Aug 2024), the widely used brand safety floor and suitability concepts remain embedded in many advertiser policies and verification tools. You can review the WFA’s GARM materials for the conceptual framework and note the discontinuation notice.
• Targeting compliance: Validate that impressions respect geography and contextual/first-party targeting.
• Measurement transparency and auditability: Use accredited measurement where possible, disclose methodology, and prefer client-initiated measurement signals for environments like CTV/SSAI to ensure auditable counts.

Relevant references include the MRC IVT Addendum (updated 2020), the IAB/MRC Retail Media Measurement Explainer (2024) that calls for clear disclosure of IVT handling, and the MRC’s SSAI/OTT Guidance (2021) for preferred CTV counting approaches.

Measurement nuances most marketers miss

• Measurable vs. viewable: A measurable impression is one where measurement could occur (the ad started to render), but it may not meet viewability thresholds. Reporting both the measurable rate and the viewable rate helps diagnose technical or inventory issues. This distinction is articulated in the MRC’s viewable ad impression guideline v2.0 and reflected in the IAB 2024 retail media guidance.
• Mobile apps and CTV: Third-party verification historically struggled with in-app and CTV environments. The Open Measurement SDK (OM SDK) has standardized in-app viewability and is evolving in CTV. Consult the IAB Tech Lab’s Open Measurement SDK resources for adoption and API updates.
• SSAI pitfalls: Server-Side Ad Insertion (SSAI) can complicate measurement and IVT detection. The MRC advises counting as close to the client as feasible and ensuring sufficient signals (IPs, device IDs) for auditors. See the MRC SSAI and OTT Guidance (2021) for details.

Where attention fits

Attention metrics (e.g., time-in-view, audibility, interaction signals) aim to measure the depth of human engagement. They are a layer on top of the verification baseline, not a substitute for it. The IAB/MRC’s Attention Measurement Guidelines (Public Comment, May 2025) position attention as person-centric measurement that assumes—and builds upon—viewability and IVT filtration.

In other words, you should first ensure you are buying and optimizing to quality impressions; then consider layering attention signals to refine performance models and creative strategy.

Scenarios and edge cases

• Below the fold but never seen: Your display ad loads but the user never scrolls to it. It will count as served, but not viewable—so it cannot be a quality impression.
• Viewable but non-human: A video ad meets the 2-second, 50%-pixels rule, but logs show data-center or botnet patterns. It is viewable but invalid traffic, so it isn’t quality.
• Suitability is policy-dependent: A news page discussing sensitive topics might be acceptable for one brand’s suitability profile but not another’s. Quality requires alignment with your brand’s declared policy and enforcement settings.
• CTV/SSAI discrepancies: If counting occurs server-side without sufficient client signals, some impressions may not be fully auditable. That undermines confidence in whether they qualify as quality impressions per your policy.

Quick diagnostic: Are you really counting quality impressions?

Use this checklist during planning, trafficking, and reporting:

• IVT
  • Are both GIVT and SIVT addressed, with methodology and rates disclosed?
  • Do reports segment IVT by type (e.g., data-center, hijacked devices) and by platform?
• Viewability
  • Are viewable rates reported alongside measurable rates and total served?
  • Are thresholds per MRC standards, and are any custom thresholds clearly labeled?
• Brand safety/suitability
  • Is there a documented policy that maps to commonly used suitability tiers, with enforcement (block/allow) rules disclosed?
  • Are violation reasons reported (and trends monitored) by site/app/placement?
• Targeting compliance
  • Are geo and context mismatches monitored and reported?
• Transparency and auditability
  • Is measurement MRC-accredited where available, and are logs sufficient for audit?
  • In CTV/SSAI, are client-initiated signals used where feasible, per MRC guidance?

If any answer is “no,” your “quality impressions” count may not reflect truly credible exposures.

Common pitfalls (and how to avoid them)

• Confusing viewability with quality: Viewability is necessary but not sufficient. Always combine with IVT filtration and brand safety/suitability.
• Using vendor labels without mapping definitions: Some vendors brand bundles like “Quality Impressions.” Ensure their definition aligns to IAB/MRC standards and your policy. See, for example, how Integral Ad Science defines Quality Impressions across viewability, IVT, suitability, and geo; then map that to your own definition before optimizing.
• Treating quality as a performance promise: Quality impressions improve the reliability of exposure counts and downstream modeling. They do not guarantee clicks or conversions.
• Conflating MFA with IVT: “Made for Advertising” sites may be low-value but not fraudulent. Use IVT standards to label fraud and suitability policies to manage MFA.

For standards and conceptual frameworks referenced above, consult:

• The IAB’s hub for the MRC Viewable Impression Guidelines, which centralizes definitions and thresholds.
• The IAB Retail Media Measurement Guidelines (2024), highlighting viewability, IVT filtration, and transparency in reporting.
• The MRC IVT Addendum (updated 2020) and 2024 interim updates for current IVT detection expectations.
• The WFA’s GARM materials for brand safety/suitability concepts and the WFA’s 2024 notice on GARM’s discontinuation, noting that many advertisers still apply the framework’s taxonomy.
• The MRC SSAI and OTT Guidance (2021) for CTV/SSAI counting and audit recommendations.
• The IAB Tech Lab’s Open Measurement SDK resources for standardized viewability in-app (and progressively in CTV).
• The IAB/MRC Attention Measurement Guidelines (Public Comment, 2025) for the relationship between attention and the verification baseline.

Practical next steps for marketers

1. Align on a written definition: Document your organization’s definition of a quality impression and map it to IAB/MRC standards. Specify thresholds, IVT expectations, suitability tiers, and targeting rules.
2. Update insertion orders and SLAs: Require reporting of viewable, measurable, and quality-impression counts, with IVT and suitability reason codes.
3. Verify your verification: Use accredited vendors and request methodology documentation. In CTV/SSAI, push for client-initiated signals and sufficient data for audits.
4. Optimize toward quality first: Reduce spend on non-viewable, high-IVT, or unsuitable placements before shifting to advanced metrics like attention.
5. Benchmark and iterate: Compare your quality rates to directional industry benchmarks from reputable verification vendors, while prioritizing your own historical baselines and goals.

By elevating your focus from “impressions served” to “quality impressions,” you ground your media strategy in credible human exposure—the bedrock for trustworthy optimization, attention modeling, and, ultimately, business impact.

References (selected):

• IAB hub for the MRC Viewable Impression Guidelines: the industry’s baseline for visibility definitions and disclosures.
• IAB Retail Media Measurement Guidelines (2024): cross-domain guidance emphasizing viewability, IVT filtration, and transparency.
• IAB/MRC Retail Media Measurement Explainer (2024): plain-language summary of transparency and IVT requirements.
• MRC Invalid Traffic Detection and Filtration Standards Addendum (updated 2020) and 2024 interim updates: definitions and detection expectations for GIVT and SIVT.
• MRC SSAI and OTT Guidance (2021): recommended counting approaches and audit signals for CTV/SSAI.
• IAB Tech Lab Open Measurement SDK resources: standardizing in-app verification and viewability.
• IAB/MRC Attention Measurement Guidelines (Public Comment, May 2025): attention as an engagement layer built on the verification baseline.