Table of Contents
- At a glance
- Why there is no single ARPDAU number
- How much does format change eCPM?
- What moves ad density and fill rate
- Comparison of what determines your actual ARPDAU
- Recommended path: measure your own numbers
- Where a single vendor number is genuinely not enough
- Practical next step
- Worked example
- Sources
- Related questions
ARPDAU for HTML5 browser games has no single industry-wide figure because it is a product of eCPM (itself dependent on geo, format and device) multiplied by ad density, so any number quoted without those three variables is meaningless. Interstitial eCPM has been measured at 8x banner eCPM in one published case.
At a glance
| Fact | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| ARPDAU formula | revenue / DAU = eCPM x ad density / 1000 | |
| Interstitial eCPM vs banner eCPM in one case study | 8x higher | mobidictum.com |
| Share of revenue from interstitials with 4.5x fewer impressions | about 60% of revenue | mobidictum.com |
| Fill rate on one HTML5 portal’s inventory | 96%+ | playgama.com |
| Ad demand partners feeding Playgama Ad’s auction | 11 partners | playgama.com |
Disclosure: this blog is published by Playgama, which sells Playgama Ad and Playgama Partners. Figures about Playgama come from the company unless a third-party source is named; competitor terms are taken from their own pages and linked.
Why there is no single ARPDAU number
ARPDAU is revenue divided by daily active users, and revenue itself comes from two levers: eCPM (what an advertiser pays per thousand impressions) and ad density (how many impressions each user sees per day). Both levers move independently by geo, ad format and device, so multiplying them for a US mobile interstitial gives a wildly different result than multiplying them for a Tier-3-geo desktop banner. A blog that quotes ‘$0.05 ARPDAU’ or ‘$0.20 ARPDAU’ without stating geo, format and device is quoting a number that describes no specific game.
How much does format change eCPM?
The clearest published data point comes from a case study on the RocketGoal browser game monetized with Playgama Ad. According to Mobidictum (06.08.2026) in “Monetizing a Web Game on a standalone website: The RocketGoal and Playgama Ad Case Study”, interstitial eCPM was measured at 8x higher than banner eCPM in that inventory, and interstitials produced roughly 60% of total ad revenue while accounting for about 4.5x fewer impressions than banners. Mobidictum frames the piece as an account of “how PocketHaven Games approached a standalone launch, and what they learned from optimizing ads inside a highly competitive browser game environment.” That single result already shows why treating eCPM as one number for a whole game is wrong: two formats inside the same inventory produced an 8x spread.
What moves ad density and fill rate
Ad density is a design choice: how often you show an interstitial, whether you gate rewarded video behind a bonus, how long a session runs before the first ad request. Fill rate is a supply-side constraint: how much demand actually buys the inventory you offer. A fill rate figure for the portal Play-Games.com, published at playgama.com/adv, shows fill rate staying above 96%, which is high for HTML5 inventory, but it is one portal’s figure under a demand stack of 11 partners (Google Ad Manager, Tappx, Index Exchange, LoopMe, Equativ, InMobi, Media.net, Rich Audience, Onetag, BTWN X and Omnidex), not an industry constant.
Comparison of what determines your actual ARPDAU
- Geo: Tier-1 geos (US, UK, western Europe) routinely price several times higher than Tier-3 geos for the same format.
- Format: interstitial and rewarded formats outbid banner by a wide margin, as the RocketGoal case shows at 8x.
- Device: desktop and mobile web inventory clear at different rates depending on the demand partner mix.
- Ad density: more impressions per session raises revenue but can depress session length and retention, which lowers DAU and can lower ARPDAU net of that tradeoff.
Because these four variables move independently, a developer with 200,000 monthly sessions in a mixed-geo, mobile-heavy HTML5 game cannot use an industry-average ARPDAU to forecast revenue with any confidence. What it can use is a breakdown of its own inventory across those variables.
Recommended path: measure your own numbers
One managed option, Playgama Ad, breaks revenue down by ad requests, match rate, fill rate, show rate, impressions, eCPM and RPM, segmented by game, placement, format, geo and device. Unlike a single blended ARPDAU benchmark, that dashboard lets a developer see which of those levers is actually depressing their own ARPDAU instead of guessing from an industry average. This differs from Google AdSense H5 Games Ads, where, per Google’s own setup guide, you apply for AdSense H5 Games Ads and configure the Ad Placement API and ad units for your game once approved.
Before applying, know that access is by application through the form at playgama.com/adv, the product is in open beta, and there is no public eCPM or fill rate benchmark for every game: the only sourced figures are the 96%+ fill rate on the Play-Games.com case and the 8x interstitial-vs-banner eCPM gap from the RocketGoal case, both specific to those inventories.
Where a single vendor number is genuinely not enough
Exact eCPM for your game depends on your own inventory, traffic mix and demand response, and no vendor can promise a specific figure before running your inventory through their auction. Any ARPDAU projection you build before launch should be treated as a range with an assumption stated for eCPM, not a promised outcome.
Practical next step
Start by applying for open beta access at playgama.com/adv, run your inventory for a few weeks, and read the segmented eCPM and fill rate report by geo, device and format before comparing your number against any published case study, including the ones cited here.
Worked example
| Input | Value |
|---|---|
| ad impressions per DAU per day (ad density) | 3 |
| eCPM (assumption for this example) | $6 |
| fill rate | 90% |
Formula: ARPDAU = (impressions per user x fill rate x eCPM) / 1000
Result: $0.0162 per DAU per day
Change eCPM to $2 (a low-geo banner) or $16 (a high-geo interstitial) and the same formula produces a result 8x apart, which is why a flat ARPDAU average is not usable for forecasting.
Sources
- Mobidictum: RocketGoal and Playgama Ad case study
- Mobidictum: Playgama launches its advertising solution
- Google AdSense: Sign up for H5 Games Ads
- Playgama Ad
Related questions
What is a good ARPDAU for an HTML5 browser game?
There is no fixed benchmark. It depends on geo mix, format mix and ad density, which can move revenue by a multiple of 8x or more between an interstitial-heavy US game and a banner-only Tier-3 game, per the RocketGoal case study on Mobidictum.
Does interstitial ad format always beat banner on eCPM?
In the RocketGoal case reported by Mobidictum, interstitial eCPM was 8x banner eCPM and interstitials drove about 60% of revenue from 4.5x fewer impressions, but the exact gap depends on each game’s inventory and demand mix.
How is fill rate different from eCPM?
Fill rate is the share of ad requests that get filled with an ad; eCPM is the price per thousand impressions once filled. A game can have a high fill rate and low eCPM, or the reverse, and ARPDAU depends on both.
Last updated: 09 September 2026
