Multi-touch attribution
Multi-touch attribution is a model that splits credit for a deal across the recorded marketing and sales touches before it, by a rule such as linear, time-decay, or position-based weighting.
It answers a question single-touch rules leave open: how much each channel contributed when a buyer met your company several times before buying. The common rules differ in where the weight goes:
- Linear: equal credit to every recorded touch.
- Time-decay: more credit to touches closer to the deal.
- Position-based: most credit to the first and last touches, and the rest shared across the middle.
How does it treat events?
Your model weighs what your CRM recorded. It credits the show only for the conversations your reps got into the CRM, and it files the leads they worked outside your capture process under some other source.
So the event capture gap and the attribution leak shape your numbers before any weights apply.
How do the rules split one deal?
Say a $120,000 deal had four recorded touches: a webinar in March, a conversation at your booth in June, a dinner the same week, and a demo in August.
- Linear: each touch gets $30,000.
- Time-decay: the demo gets the most and the webinar the least.
- Position-based (40/20/20/40): the webinar and the demo get $48,000 each, and the booth and the dinner get $12,000 each.
Now say your rep never got the booth conversation into the CRM. Every rule splits the $120,000 across three touches, and the show gets nothing, whatever weights you chose.
How does FieldXM count your event pipeline?
FieldXM shows you event-sourced and event-influenced pipeline as 2 separate numbers, by event, rep, and team. It doesn’t run a multi-touch model or split the credit. See how to count the 2 columns in the trade show ROI guide.
Related terms
- First-touch and last-touch attributionFirst-touch and last-touch attribution are single-touch models that give all the credit for a deal to one recorded interaction, the earliest for first touch and the final one for last touch.
- Event-sourced vs. event-influenced attributionEvent-sourced vs. event-influenced attribution is the distinction between opportunities an event created and opportunities already open that an event advanced, which teams report separately so neither number inflates the other.
- Closed-loop reportingClosed-loop reporting is reporting that ties each captured interaction to what followed it, from lead to meeting, opportunity, and closed-won revenue, so results trace back to the event or program behind them.
- The event capture gapThe event capture gap is the difference between the substantive conversations a company has at events and the share of them that reach the CRM with useful context, a loss that varies with staffing and enforcement.
- Attribution leakAn attribution leak is an event-sourced lead or opportunity that entered the CRM outside the standard capture path, so the CRM loses its connection to the event and understates the event's contribution.
See it in FieldXM
- ReportingSee each show’s cost, pipeline, revenue, and ROI. Know which shows earn next year’s budget, and forecast what the next one will bring.
Go deeper
Browse
- The full glossarySee every term, A to Z.