Skip to Content
AnalyticsWidget analytics

What widget analytics answer

Widget analytics answer two practical questions about every campaign you run:

  • Is this campaign being seen? How many impressions, how many unique visitors, how many of them come back.
  • Is it converting into proof we can use? How many people start the flow, how many submit, and of those, how many pass review.

The dashboard is built so you can read those two questions from a single campaign view without thinking about whether a submitter came through the widget or the webpage surface; both feed the same numbers. A separate breakdown is available when you do want to compare the two channels.

Core signals

Six signals cover the lifecycle from impression to verified submission. The first four are campaign-level KPIs. The last two are platform-level. All of them are cumulative since the campaign launched.

Campaign-level

  • Impressions: how many times the widget or webpage was rendered. One render equals one impression, including repeats.
  • Unique visitors: distinct submitters who saw the campaign, deduplicated.
  • Repeat visitors: visitors who came back at least one additional time after their first view.
  • Average time from impression to submission: for submitters who actually submitted, the mean elapsed time between first impression and their submit click.

Platform-level (per platform configured on the campaign)

  • Platform selection count: how many submitters picked this specific platform from the choose-a-platform screen.
  • Submissions created: how many of those selectors actually completed and submitted.
  • Verified submissions: how many of those submissions were approved at review.
  • Rejected submissions: how many were rejected.
  • Verification rate: verified divided by reviewed (verified + rejected).

The split between selections and submissions is the most useful diagnostic on this page. A high selection count combined with a low submission count means the draft step is losing people: either the proof requirement is too heavy or the platform’s review flow is too involved. A high submission count combined with a low verification rate means the proof people are sending in does not match what the campaign actually asks for.

The analytics view at the campaign level with the four campaign-level KPIs and the per-platform table visible together

Reading the funnel

The simplest way to read a campaign is top-to-bottom across the four campaign-level KPIs plus the per-platform numbers:

  1. Impressions tell you whether the campaign is being shown at all. Low impressions mean the surface (widget on your site, dedicated landing page, or both) is not getting traffic. That is a placement problem, not a campaign problem.
  2. Unique visitors filtered against impressions tell you whether traffic is repeat or one-off. A campaign with 10,000 impressions and 500 unique visitors is being shown to the same 500 people 20 times each.
  3. Repeat visitors indicate intent. People who come back twice without submitting are interested but blocked on something, usually the proof requirement.
  4. Platform selection count vs Submissions created tells you whether the draft step is the drop-off.
  5. Verified vs Rejected plus the Verification rate tells you whether the proof people send matches what you ask for.

A healthy campaign typically shows selection count and submission count close to each other (people who pick a platform follow through), and a verification rate above 70%. When verification rate sits below 50% on a specific platform, the campaign’s instructions for that platform are usually the cause.

Per-campaign vs account-wide view

Widget analytics in this version are scoped per campaign. Each campaign has its own analytics page with its own KPIs. There is no account-wide rollup that aggregates impressions or submissions across every campaign in a single dashboard. If you run several campaigns at once, compare them by opening each campaign’s analytics page individually.

The campaigns list does surface a small set of headline numbers next to each row (so you can scan which campaigns are getting traffic and which are not), but the full breakdown lives on the per-campaign analytics view.

Comparing widget vs webpage performance

Most campaigns run on both a widget (embedded on your site) and a webpage (a hosted landing page). Both surfaces feed the same campaign-level KPIs by default: an impression on the widget and an impression on the webpage are both counted toward the campaign’s impression total. This is the right default when you want to ask “how is this campaign doing?” without worrying about channel.

To compare the two channels directly, use the source filter on the Submissions table. Every submission is tagged with its source (Widget or Webpage). Filtering the submissions list by source gives you a per-channel view of submission volume and verification outcomes.

A dedicated side-by-side analytics view for widget vs webpage is not in this version. Treat the campaign-level dashboard as the canonical view and use the submissions source filter for the channel-split question.

Pairing analytics with proof quality

Numbers on this page are most useful when paired with what you see in the Proof Library and on individual submissions. A verification rate of 60% looks weak on the dashboard, but the explanation is usually visible in the rejected submissions themselves: wrong platform URL, screenshot of the draft instead of the published review, expired campaign URL, and so on. The dashboard tells you where to look. The proof tells you what to fix.

When verification rate drops on a campaign that was previously healthy, open the rejected submissions for that campaign and check whether the rejections share a pattern. If they do, the campaign’s instructions or the proof requirement usually need an update. If they do not, the dip is probably noise and will recover.

Known limitations

Three things to keep in mind when reading this page in the current version.

  • No channel-split dashboard. Both widget and webpage feed the same campaign-level KPIs. Use the Submissions table source filter when you need a channel-by-channel comparison.
  • No per-recipient email analytics. Open rates and click rates for submitter status emails or team alert emails are not tracked here.
  • No proof-rating filters in the Proof Library. When you are diagnosing a drop in verification rate, you cannot yet filter or sort the Proof Library by star rating.

These are scope choices for the current version and will be revisited.

What is not yet measured

A handful of signals that are common in adjacent products are intentionally not in this version:

  • Click-through rate from the widget impression to the choose-a-platform screen as a standalone metric. The selection count captures the downstream conversion, so the intermediate click is not surfaced.
  • Heatmaps, scroll depth, or any pixel-level engagement on the widget itself.
  • Email open and click metrics for status emails and team alerts.
  • Attribution from outside referrers: which page, ad, or email drove a submitter to the widget. The Submissions table records a source channel (Widget or Webpage), not a referrer.
  • A/B comparison of widget variants. This is not yet exposed; each campaign has a single widget configuration.

If one of these missing signals is blocking a decision, the workaround for most teams is pairing your existing web analytics (impression counts on the page hosting the widget) with the campaign-level numbers in HighAdvocacy.

Last updated on
AnalyticsTroubleshooting