As privacy rules intensify and browsers restrict traditional tracking, many advertisers are considering a switch from client-side to server-side tracking. But beyond compliance, the real question remains: can it actually improve campaign performance?

At Equeco, we implemented and tested server-side tracking for Viajala—a flight metasearch platform with millions of users—across Google and Meta Ads to measure the real impact on conversion tracking and ultimately campaign efficiency. The results indicate that the value of server-side tracking varies significantly across platforms.

‍

Which Publishers Provide Native Server-Side Tracking

Among major ad platforms, Google and Meta provide native server-to-server solutions.. Microsoft Ads does not yet offer a native equivalent; therefore, this analysis will focus on the former two publishers.

‍

Google Ads: No Impact

Comparing Google Ads with Viajala’s in-house analytics before and after server-side tracking showed only a 2% improvement—not statistically significant.

Google Ads already tracks reliably in a first-party context: cookies are set via your own domain, ad blockers generally whitelist its scripts, and Chrome allows them by default.

With backup identifiers like GCLID and enhanced conversions, attribution remains accurate, leaving little room for server-side gains.

‍

Meta: Clear Positive Impact

For Meta, server-side tracking delivered an 9% uplift in attributed conversions. 

This makes sense because the client-side pixel is frequently blocked by browsers and ad blockers, and often loses attribution on iOS due to privacy restrictions. 

Server-side events bypass these limits and include stronger identifiers, allowing Meta to match more conversions back to ads.

‍

Cost of Server-Side Tracking

Server-side tracking requires extra infrastructure and ongoing maintenance, adding development time, server resources, and monitoring work. It’s not costly per event, but it introduces a permanent operational overhead.

‍

Conclusion: Is server-side tracking worth the hassle?

If your goal is purely better conversion tracking, the value of server-side depends on how much you spend on Google Ads vs. Meta. Google’s client-side tracking is already strong, so server-side adds little. Meta, on the other hand, suffers from signal loss, and server-side brings a clear lift in attribution. The trade-off is extra setup and maintenance. In short: server-side is worth it for Meta-heavy advertisers, but offers limited gains for Google-focused ones.