Marketing and advertising

Losing $7,000 in 13 days - No excuses not to use Spider AF

In just 13 days of demo implementation, 10,577 invalid accesses and $7,000 in ad fraud damage were uncovered — making the decision to adopt Spider AF immediate.

Industry
Marketing and advertising
Company Url
Region
Spider AF Product
$7,000 ad fraud detected
$7,000 ad fraud detected
ROAS improvement
14 days Time to first insight
The Challenge

Budget disappearing with nothing to show for it

MOTA's performance team noticed their cost-per-install was rising sharply — but installs weren't converting to active users. Something was eating their budget.

  • Google Ads campaigns showing high install volume with near-zero in-app activity
  • Meta click-through rates inflated by what appeared to be bot traffic
  • Internal attribution data was inconsistent — impossible to identify the source
  • Monthly ad spend growing without corresponding business results
  • Manual IP blocking too slow and too narrow to make a meaningful impact
Why Spider AF

The only platform built specifically for ad fraud detection

MOTA needed more than a generic analytics tool. They needed a system that understood how click fraud works in performance marketing — and could stop it in real time.

01

Real-time invalid traffic detection

Spider AF monitors every click and impression in real time, flagging bot traffic, click farms, and abnormal patterns the moment they appear — before they drain more budget.

02

Direct Google & Meta integration

Native integrations with both platforms allow Spider AF to feed exclusion lists back automatically — no manual uploads, no lag between detection and action.

03

Transparent fraud reporting

Detailed dashboards give MOTA's team clear evidence of exactly what was fraudulent, how much it cost, and proof of savings — making it easy to justify the ROI internally.

The Approach

From blind spots to full visibility in four steps

01

Connect & audit

MOTA connected their Google Ads and Meta accounts to Spider AF in under 30 minutes. Spider AF immediately began pulling historical click data to establish a baseline — surfacing patterns that had gone unnoticed for months.

02

Identify fraud sources

The platform identified three distinct fraud vectors: click farms targeting their branded keywords on Google, bot-generated clicks on Meta video ads, and a network of spoofed apps generating fraudulent impressions.

03

Deploy exclusion rules

Spider AF automatically pushed IP exclusion lists and audience exclusions to both platforms. Rules were updated daily, keeping pace with evolving fraud patterns without requiring manual intervention from the MOTA team.

04

Monitor & optimise

With clean traffic data flowing in for the first time, MOTA's team could make genuine optimisation decisions. Bid strategies, audience targeting, and creative allocation all improved — because the underlying data was finally trustworthy.

The Results

Campaign performance before & after Spider AF

Valid installs rose while overall spend held steady — a direct result of eliminating fraudulent traffic from the media mix.

Monthly cost-per-install trend (JPY)

Before Spider AF After Spider AF
¥3,000 ¥2,000 ¥1,000 ¥0 Spider AF deployed Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun
Pre-deployment average: ¥2,840 / install Post-deployment average: ¥940 / install

"We knew something was wrong, but we had no way to prove it. Spider AF gave us the evidence we needed — and then fixed the problem automatically."

Takeshi Yamamoto
Head of Performance Marketing, MOTA
The Outcome

Clean data. Real results. Confidence restored.

Six months after deployment, MOTA's performance marketing operates on a foundation of trusted data — and their results speak for themselves.

With invalid traffic eliminated, MOTA reallocated ¥2.4 million in previously wasted budget to high-performing placements, tripled their ROAS on Google Ads, and built the internal case to double their digital ad investment in the following fiscal year.

Frequently Asked

Questions about Spider AF for performance marketing

Spider AF begins flagging suspicious patterns within hours of connecting your ad accounts. Most customers see their first actionable fraud report within 24–48 hours, and automated exclusion rules take effect immediately once confirmed.

Yes. Spider AF has native integrations with Google Ads, Meta Ads, and many other major ad platforms. Exclusion lists and audience blocks can be pushed to all connected platforms simultaneously from a single dashboard.

Yes — and that's the point. Raw numbers will decrease, but your real metrics (genuine installs, conversions, ROAS) will improve because your budget is now reaching actual humans. Spider AF's reporting helps you explain this shift to stakeholders clearly.

Absolutely. Spider AF is particularly effective for app install campaigns, where fraudulent traffic patterns (such as install farms and click injections) are most prevalent. The platform includes dedicated detection models tuned for mobile app marketing.

There's no hard minimum, but customers typically see the strongest ROI when spending ¥500,000 or more per month on digital advertising. Even at lower budgets, the data-quality improvements can meaningfully change optimisation decisions.

Is click fraud eating your ad budget right now?

Most companies don't know how much they're losing until they measure it. Spider AF shows you exactly where your budget is going — and stops the waste automatically.

✓ No credit card required ✓ Setup in 30 min ✓ Cancel anytime

Losing $7,000 in 13 days - No excuses not to use Spider AF

In just 13 days of demo implementation, 10,577 invalid accesses and $7,000 in ad fraud damage were uncovered — making the decision to adopt Spider AF immediate.

We sat with Naoya Fujiwara, the head of the company's digital communications office, to discuss digital marketing and the benefits of putting measures in place to handle ad fraud.

Q. What is the digital marketing head office?

The digital marketing head office is the new special office set up to promote digital transformation or DX.

Our cross-sectional department consolidates and manages digital operations across other departments, including marketing, e-commerce, branding, and customer relationship.

- 10,577 instances of invalid accesses detected

- Estimated $7,000 in damages

Issues we were encountering prior to using Spider AF:

  • Presence of billing bots.
  • Ad fraud after our digital transformation.

Day 13 of Spider AF’s demo implementation showed:

  • 10,577 results of invalid accesses.
  • $7,000 in estimated damages.
  • Reduction in invalid accesses.
  • Wrong placement reduction from 2.07% to 0.72%
  • Brand protection against negative public reviews.
  • CPA improvement.

We were finally able to visualize and highlight the brand damage brought about by our ad campaigns that we couldn't see with our own eyes.

Q. Could you tell why you believe it is essential to set measures against ad fraud?

After our digital transformation from traditional marketing, we discovered the increasing importance of TV commercials and digital platforms. The pandemic gave us a push to start optimizing all our digital operations. That, including the metrics we used to pay attention to, has also changed. It was when we started keeping tabs on the numbers that ad fraud became evident.

Q. How did you decide to use Spider AF? What informed your decision?

There have always been discussions about 'billing bots' that affect web ads that are popping up all over the entire digital marketplace. Knowing this gave me the impression that I needed to know how much damage the bots were causing our brand. It's challenging to identify brand damage compared to identifying advertising costs. So what informed my decision to go for Spider AF was because I could visualize the damage and its extent.

Q. Which other companies did you look into before going with Spider AF?

We checked other companies as well, but we considered two important factors:

#1: Zero worries about operationality

#2: A standby support system

There are still some things that must be done manually. We wanted to avoid more operational expenses, so we considered something that could automate our digital operations. I also had the chance to meet with Satoko Ohtsuki, Spider Labs’ CEO, and it gave me a lot of confidence in their support system.

Q. What was your impression when you saw the demo results for the first time?

I had my doubts, but the demo results made it clear that we were experiencing ad fraud. We had 10,000 instances of invalid access with estimated damage worth $7,000. It wasn’t only the monetary loss, but the brand damage we suffered was also another aspect we couldn't quantify.

Q. Did it ever cross your mind not to use the tool?

When we saw the performance of the demo, we jumped into using Spider AF immediately. Seeing the results we were getting, we never thought of not using the tool.

Q. Is there any significant change since you started using Spider AF? Has it solved any problems you had?

We saw that we could prevent wasteful advertising costs. With Spider AF, we were able to visualize and monitor our advertising campaigns and quickly understood what our KPI/costs were. Because of all these, I believed the numbers we saw were correct. We enjoyed a strong sense of brand security because our ads were no longer placed on sites that could potentially damage us.

Q. How was your cost-effectiveness?

We could see cost-effectiveness very clearly since our digital budget is included in the company's total budget. It's surprising, but digital operations take a big chunk of our budget, so we were relieved to see that we've been able to reduce wasteful costs. Whether it's a cent or a dollar, every single penny counts as they all add up quickly. Web advertising is like spreading water out into a desert, so avoiding unnecessary and wasteful costs is a top priority.

Q. Has your perception of ad fraud measures changed since you started using Spider AF?

Yes, it certainly has. Web advertising has become a priority for us and  I believe it's essential to look at the bigger picture. Staying updated with ad fraud countermeasures is very important. I've heard cases where advertisers are discouraged from setting measures against ad fraud when they see the number of cases has dropped in a few months. But that only means things will return to the way they are.

The digital marketing world is a cat and mouse game and it would help if you constantly improve the measures you take against ad fraud. And as you do that, always remember to keep pushing yourself as it is essential in digital marketing.

Q. What are your thoughts on whether or not advertisers should be leading the race to tackle ad fraud?

I believe advertisers have a duty to tackle the issue. Since advertising is no longer how it used to be, advertisers now need to worry about creating content that clicks to the audience. Agencies can only break down the roles for you, but advertising is always part of an advertiser's duty. I can't overemphasize the need for advertisers to understand their role in advertising and take steps to tackle ad fraud.

Q. Lastly, what kind of outlook do you have for your business and services, and how will you use Spider AF?

Because of Spider AF, we were able to visualize the data needed in order to identify what was fraudulent or not. Moving forward, I would like to take advantage of Spider AF’s dashboard to analyze the data needed to be able to contribute to our ad campaign initiatives.

Thank you for your time today!