Skip to main content
An organization maturing its identity strategy faces a common challenge: dozens of third-party identity providers offer overlapping capabilities, and it is not always clear which providers deliver incremental value versus redundant coverage. This cookbook provides a structured evaluation process for choosing between graph enrichment and addressability expansion providers and measuring their contribution.

What this cookbook covers

This cookbook walks through a five-step evaluation process:
  1. Define whether you need graph enrichment, addressability expansion, or both
  2. Baseline your current identity graph and match rates
  3. Select providers for proof-of-concept testing
  4. Measure each provider’s incremental contribution
  5. Evaluate commercial terms and build a layered strategy
The result is a repeatable framework you can apply each time you evaluate a new provider or renegotiate an existing relationship.

Prerequisites

Before starting, ensure you have:

Step 1: Define your primary objective

Start by identifying which problem you are solving: Choose graph enrichment if:
  • Your audience segments feel fragmented—the same customers appear as multiple profiles
  • Your frequency capping is ineffective because you cannot recognize users across devices
  • Your attribution is unreliable because conversion paths break across identifier boundaries
  • You need to improve person-level or household-level resolution before activation
Choose addressability expansion if:
  • Your segmentation is sound but match rates on activation platforms are low
  • You have strong first-party identity but limited identifier type diversity
  • You are expanding to new activation channels (CTV, programmatic audio, digital out-of-home) that use identifier types you do not currently have
  • You need immediate lift in campaign reach without changing your targeting logic
Choose both if:
  • You have fragmented profiles (graph enrichment problem) AND low platform match rates (addressability problem)
  • You are building identity infrastructure for the first time and need both resolution and reach
Most organizations eventually need both, but the sequencing matters. Graph enrichment typically comes first because better resolution improves the accuracy of everything downstream, including addressability expansion.

Step 2: Baseline your current state

Before evaluating any provider, measure where you stand today.

For graph enrichment: measure graph structure

Key metrics to record:

For addressability expansion: measure match rates

Record your current match rates on each activation platform you use. These become the baseline against which you measure provider lift.

Step 3: Select providers for proof of concept

For graph enrichment providers

Evaluate candidates on:
  • Linkage methodology. Deterministic linkages from login events are more reliable than probabilistic linkages from behavioral signals. Understand each provider’s methodology mix.
  • Update cadence. Identity data has a shelf life. Providers that refresh linkages monthly are more valuable than those refreshing quarterly.
  • Incremental coverage. A provider whose linkages overlap 90% with your existing graph adds less value than one with 40% overlap and 60% net new edges.

For addressability expansion providers

Evaluate candidates on:
  • Identifier type coverage. If you need MAIDs for programmatic and hashed phones for social, ensure the provider covers both.
  • Platform-specific match rates. Ask providers for benchmark match rates on the specific platforms you activate on.
  • Freshness guarantees. Appended identifiers that are six months old will have significantly lower match rates than those observed within the last 30 days.

How to evaluate incremental vs. overlapping coverage

Use NQL to measure overlap between a candidate provider and your existing data:

Step 4: Measure incremental contribution

Run a time-boxed proof of concept with each shortlisted provider and measure specific outcomes.

For graph enrichment: measure structural improvement

For addressability expansion: measure activation lift

Measuring before and after in Narrative

Create materialized views that capture your baseline and post-enrichment states:

Step 5: Evaluate commercial terms

Identity data pricing varies significantly. Consider:

The layered identity strategy

Most mature identity strategies follow a phased approach:

Phase 1: Graph foundation

Build your first-party graph with deterministic linkages from login events, CRM data, and transaction records. This is your highest-confidence data and forms the foundation for everything else.

Phase 2: Addressability expansion

Once your graph foundation is solid, expand addressability to improve activation reach. This delivers immediate, measurable ROI through higher match rates and broader campaign reach.

Phase 3: Graph enrichment

With addressability established, invest in graph enrichment to improve structural resolution. Better resolution improves segmentation accuracy, frequency capping, and attribution—benefits that compound over time.

Phase 4: Continuous measurement

Identity is not a one-time project. Establish ongoing measurement of graph quality, match rates, and provider contribution. Re-evaluate providers annually as the identity landscape shifts with privacy regulations, platform changes, and new identifier standards.

Summary


Identity Graphs

Core concepts behind identity graph structure

Graph Enrichment

Strengthening graph structure with third-party linkage data

Addressability Expansion

Improving activation reach by appending identifiers

Data Activation

Delivering audiences to destination platforms

Demographic Enrichment

A related pattern: enriching records with demographic attributes