{"id":14154,"date":"2026-09-09T13:25:28","date_gmt":"2026-09-09T13:25:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/playgama.com\/blog\/?p=14154"},"modified":"2026-09-09T13:25:28","modified_gmt":"2026-09-09T13:25:28","slug":"what-is-arpdau-for-html5-browser-games","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/playgama.com\/blog\/business-faqs\/what-is-arpdau-for-html5-browser-games\/","title":{"rendered":"What is ARPDAU for HTML5 browser games?"},"content":{"rendered":"

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.<\/strong><\/p>\n

At a glance<\/h2>\n
\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Fact<\/th>\nValue<\/th>\nSource<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n
ARPDAU formula<\/td>\nrevenue \/ DAU = eCPM x ad density \/ 1000<\/td>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Interstitial eCPM vs banner eCPM in one case study<\/td>\n8x higher<\/td>\nmobidictum.com<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Share of revenue from interstitials with 4.5x fewer impressions<\/td>\nabout 60% of revenue<\/td>\nmobidictum.com<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Fill rate on one HTML5 portal\u2019s inventory<\/td>\n96%+<\/td>\nplaygama.com<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
Ad demand partners feeding Playgama Ad\u2019s auction<\/td>\n11 partners<\/td>\nplaygama.com<\/a><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table><\/div>\n

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.<\/em><\/p>\n

Why there is no single ARPDAU number<\/h2>\n

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 \u2018$0.05 ARPDAU\u2019 or \u2018$0.20 ARPDAU\u2019 without stating geo, format and device is quoting a number that describes no specific game.<\/p>\n

How much does format change eCPM?<\/h2>\n

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 \u201cMonetizing a Web Game on a standalone website: The RocketGoal and Playgama Ad Case Study\u201d<\/a>, 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 \u201chow PocketHaven Games approached a standalone launch, and what they learned from optimizing ads inside a highly competitive browser game environment.\u201d 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.<\/p>\n

What moves ad density and fill rate<\/h2>\n

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<\/a>, shows fill rate staying above 96%, which is high for HTML5 inventory, but it is one portal\u2019s 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.<\/p>\n

Comparison of what determines your actual ARPDAU<\/h2>\n