.png)
.png)
The scenario is probably familiar to you. You're sitting in a client meeting and proudly presenting the results of your Meta Ads campaign: "35 conversions this week!" you shout enthusiastically. Your colleague from Google Ads looks at you and says, "Interesting, I count 42 with me." And then silence falls. Your client opens his laptop, checks the backend of his webshop and says, "Guys, I only count a total of 55." This situation is not only uncomfortable, it is destructive to the trust between you, your team and your customers. The problem is not that you are bad at what you do. The problem is that no one is talking about the same numbers.
Why each platform shows different numbers
The difference in numbers is because each marketing platform uses its own method of measuring and attributing conversions. For example, Meta Ads counts view-through conversions, which are conversions from people who saw your ad but didn't click on it. Google Ads, on the other hand, claims conversions via data-driven attribution which looks suspiciously like last-click attribution, where the last click before the conversion gets all the credit. The backend data simply shows the actual number of transactions that occurred.
Google Analytics 4 tries to merge all these different data sources and give a complete picture, but GA4 also has its own way of measuring. It uses UTM parameters and has its own attribution model, which in turn can lead to different numbers than what you see in the individual marketing platforms. Server-Side Tagging can ensure that all platforms receive the same events from your website, but each platform still processes this data in its own way. So the technical solution does not solve the organizational problem of different interpretations and expectations.
The real problem: trust and alignment
It's not just about the technical differences between platforms. The real problem arises when:
- Different team members look at different dashboards and each tells their own story
- Clients confused by conflicting reports
- Budget decisions are made based on different data sets
- No one knows which numbers are actually correct anymore
This leads to an organization that no longer trusts itself. Your customer sees three different stories and therefore doesn't believe one of them. The result? Doubt about the effectiveness of your marketing, discussions about which platform actually works best, and ultimately reduced trust and budget for your marketing activities.
How do you solve this? Create a shared truth
The solution lies not only in better technology, but more importantly in creating one shared truth that everyone looks at. Here are the steps you can take:
1. Determine one primary source of truth
Choose one platform or dashboard as your main reporting source. This could be Google Analytics 4, a dedicated dashboard like AdPage, or even your client's backend data. Most importantly, make sure everyone - you, your team, and your client - is looking at the same numbers when you talk about performance.
2. Explain the differences transparently
Be honest about why the numbers differ between platforms. Explain that Meta Ads measures view-through conversions, that Google Ads primarily uses last-click attribution, and that GA4 has its own attribution model. This transparency builds trust rather than tearing it down.
3. Focus on trends rather than absolute numbers
Instead of discussing whether it was 35, 42 or 55 conversions, look at the trends. Are conversions going up or down? Which campaigns are performing better than others? These relative comparisons are often more valuable than absolute numbers.
4. Use attribution modeling strategically
Apply different attribution models for different purposes. For example, for budget allocation, you can use last-click attribution to see which channels complete conversions. For strategic planning, you can use first-click or linear attribution to understand which channels create awareness.
What perspectives are important?
When you analyze and report data, there are several angles you can use:
For you and your team:
- Performance by platform: Which platform delivers the best cost-per-conversion according to its own data?
- Cross-platform journey analysis: How do your channels work together in the customer journey?
- Attribution overlap: At how many conversions do multiple platforms claim a contribution?
For your customers:
- Business impact: What is the overall impact on sales and profits, regardless of which platform claims the credits?
- Channel efficiency: Which channels deliver the best return on investment?
- Growth trends: How does overall performance evolve over time?
Practical reporting tips:
Use contextual explanation: "Meta Ads reports 35 conversions including view-through conversions. Google Ads shows 42 conversions via last-click attribution. Your backend data shows 55 total transactions. The overlap between platforms suggests that our channels work well together."
Focus on incrementality: Test what happens when you temporarily shut down a platform. This provides insight into the true incremental value of each channel.
Use mixed attribution: Combine different attribution models to get a complete picture of how your marketing is working.
The human factor: alignment within your team
Technology alone won't solve the problem. You also need alignment within your team and with your customers. This means:
- Regular alignment: Discuss weekly with your team what numbers you are using for what decisions
- Shared definitions: Make sure everyone understands the same thing by terms like "conversion," "attribution window" and "success metrics"
- Educate clients: Help your clients understand why numbers differ and what this means for their business
A practical example: the weekly report
Instead of saying, "Meta Ads delivered 35 conversions and Google Ads delivered 42," try this:
"This week we achieved a total of 55 conversions according to your backend data. Our analysis shows that Meta Ads contributed mainly to awareness and first contact moments, while Google Ads was effective in converting people who were already interested. The collaboration between the two channels resulted in a 15% increase over last week." This approach recognizes the complexity of multi-touch attribution while keeping focus on what really matters: the overall business impact.
Conclusion: from chaos to trust
The problem of different metrics between marketing platforms is not going away by itself. It only gets more complex as you add more channels and the customer journey gets longer. But with the right approach, you can move from this chaos to confidence. The key lies in transparency, shared agreements about what metrics you use, and focus on what really matters to your customer: growing their business. Server-Side Tagging can help improve data quality, but the real solution lies in how you as a team deal with the inherent complexity of modern marketing attribution. Stop arguing about which platform is right. Start creating one story that everyone understands and trusts. That's how you keep marketing teams from imploding and how you build trust instead of tearing it down.