Using predicted LTV in bids: disclosure checklist for the UA team
Analysis
By UA Ledger staff — 1 min read

Predicted LTV models need known failure modes before scale. Disclosure checklist — not a vendor model card.
Bidding on predicted LTV without saying so turns a model error into a “channel” failure.
Disclosure checklist
- Observed vs predicted — State whether the bid target uses observed
af_revenue(events overview) or a forecast. - SKAN modelled rows — If the SKAN overview modelled metrics (null-CV fill) enter the target, say so explicitly.
- Training scope — Write geo, platform, and genre mix the model saw.
- Failure modes — List known breaks (ATT opt-in shock, new geo, new creative hook).
- Change control — No silent definition swap mid A/B.
Facts vs limits
| Fact | Limit |
|---|---|
| Observed revenue and SKAN modelled metrics are documented as distinct | Full vendor model cards are often private |
| Checklist is governance | Not a validation of any pLTV vendor |
CSV.
Draft prepared 20 September 2026. Local expansion-500 file; human editorial review pending. No CMS write.
Featured
Related posts
measurement
media buying
·1 min read
Blended ROAS targets that hide channel failure in F2P portfolios
measurement
media buying
·2 min read
Web-shop LTV with VAT-inclusive prices versus store net proceeds (labelled synthetic)
measurement
media buying
·1 min read
View-through attribution windows on F2P rewarded and interstitial traffic
measurement
media buying
·1 min read
Time-to-first-pay after soft-currency drought events
More from the Measurement desk
measurement
·2 min read
Airbridge adds Amazon Ads as an app measurement channel
measurement
·2 min read
When to freeze a cohort for payback review (and when not to)
measurement
·1 min read
Web-shop purchaser quality vs store IAP purchaser quality
measurement
·1 min read