Robust attribution solutions are supporting upper funnel affiliates, ensuring they receive credit and commissions for driving traffic and sales.
That’s the finding of the world’s first independent audit of ten UK affiliate networks and platforms conducted by the APMA earlier this year.
‘Attribution rules’ that prioritise earlier affiliate contributions when browser extensions and other affiliate types ultimately convert the sale kicked in for 80% of the tests, showing some form of protection for the original referring affiliate.
The technology, however, which has been in place across mainstream UK networks for more than a decade, is not always consistent in its application and shows variation in its implementation.
Although the results show that most UK networks and platforms already apply some form of protection for upper funnel affiliates, the audit also uncovered gaps that create uneven experiences for brands and partners.
Stand-down rules can fail when advertiser setups change, soft-click is not yet widely adopted, and browser extensions behave differently depending on the user’s device or browser. These inconsistencies mean that affiliates who introduce or influence customers earlier in the journey are not always guaranteed the credit they deserve.
To address this, APMA has produced seven recommendations aimed at improving consistency and transparency.
Recommendations
Broader use of soft-click and stand-down attribution.
Mandatory stand-down for cashback and loyalty extensions to protect earlier funnel affiliates.
Stronger prevention of manual reactivation from restoring the last click credit where it undermines attribution logic.
Industry-wide standardisation of tagging conventions.
Clear signposting of which affiliates are subject to soft-click or stand-down requirements.
Dual implementation of soft-click and stand-down to create the most robust safeguards.
Preventing affiliates from bypassing attribution rules through subnetworks or alternative models unless equivalent safeguards are proven.
The audit was triggered by renewed concerns following the Honey controversy in late 2024, during which browser extensions were accused of diverting commissions from influencers and publishers. The APMA responded by commissioning a fully independent review to raise awareness of the issue and clarity about how networks and platforms operate in the UK.
On November 21, 2025, a US judge dismissed the main class-action lawsuit against PayPal/Honey.
More detail about the audit
The audit reviewed ten affiliate networks and platforms and focused on three affiliate types that activate once a consumer is already on an advertiser’s site. These were discount browser extensions, cashback browser extensions and on site marketing technologies such as overlays and basket abandonment tools.
These models can influence the consumer at a late stage in the journey and are more likely to overwrite the work of earlier funnel affiliates if attribution rules are not applied. This has long created tension due to last click attribution models still dominating how affiliates are paid.
Between March and May 2025, an independent consultant carried out controlled tests simulating real customer journeys.
Each scenario began with a referral from a control affiliate and then deliberately triggered the activation of a browser extension or on site tool. Did the initial referrer receive credit, or did the later technology claim the sale? Three outcomes were observed across the platforms. These were soft-click, stand-down or a full reversion to last click attribution.
Soft-click is applied at platform level and prevents certain clicks from overwriting existing tracking. Because it is centrally managed, it is viewed as one of the most reliable safeguards.
Stand-down was the most common mechanism. In this scenario, the browser extension or on site tool suppresses itself when earlier affiliate traffic is detected. Stand-down varied in quality. Some affiliates fully suppressed their technology while others retained small indicators that could prompt manual reactivation.
When users manually reactivated an extension, attribution reverted to last click and the test affiliate frequently claimed the sale. A smaller number of scenarios applied no protection at all.
The results
Across the entire test set, the auditor recorded 21 cases of stand-down, three cases of soft-click and four cases where soft-click operated as a back up to stand-down. The findings demonstrate that while protections exist and are typically applied, implementation across the industry lacks consistency.
Technical errors, changes in advertiser setup and differences in browser behaviour can all cause stand-down to fail. These issues underline the need for stronger governance, clear standards and more regular auditing.
On site marketing technologies showed the strongest overall performance. With one exception caused by a misconfigured tracking parameter, they stood down reliably in all tests.
Discount browser extensions produced mixed results. Some used soft-click or strong stand-down behaviour, while others defaulted to last click with no protection. Cashback extensions relied almost exclusively on stand-down because soft-click would prevent consumers from earning their reward. Although they performed well, user reactivation remains a challenge, as it restores last click logic.
The findings reveal that the industry has taken important steps to protect earlier referrers but still needs more consistent rules. Another important risk is the use of subnetworks that can allow affiliates to operate outside attribution safeguards. APMA recommends greater visibility and control in this area.
Want to read the report in full? Fill in the form below to receive your copy.
______________________________________________________________
