Using predicted LTV in bids: disclosure checklist for the UA team

Analysis

By UA Ledger staff1 min read

Using predicted LTV in bids: disclosure checklist for the UA team

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

  1. Observed vs predicted — State whether the bid target uses observed af_revenue (events overview) or a forecast.
  2. SKAN modelled rows — If the SKAN overview modelled metrics (null-CV fill) enter the target, say so explicitly.
  3. Training scope — Write geo, platform, and genre mix the model saw.
  4. Failure modes — List known breaks (ATT opt-in shock, new geo, new creative hook).
  5. Change control — No silent definition swap mid A/B.

Facts vs limits

Reference table
FactLimit
Observed revenue and SKAN modelled metrics are documented as distinctFull vendor model cards are often private
Checklist is governanceNot 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

Web-shop attributed revenue in MMP vs payment-provider settlements