Click to open rates are low

[Jamie_Barclay]

Hi everyone,
I've noted that in general our open rates are pretty good (almost 40%) but the click-to-open rates are hovering around 5%.  This seems low especially when the CTA is to an informational website or to download a PDF that provides far more information that is included in the email. I'm wondering if this seems low (especially since the open rates are good) and/or if you have any insight you can share.

Thank you

[Ronen-Was-SRpro]

Hi Jamie,

It also depends if you are sending them to private emails or to a company and corporate emails. Most of the companies servers detect the email and open it automatically to check if it is harmful. In this situation, you see that it was open however the person never saw the email.

[Jo_Pitts1]

Jamie,

Everyone has spoken to the technical aspects of the low CTR that you've got.  This is super valid! 

While your open rates might be inflated (but they may not if people aren't loading images), It is reasonable to assume that tracking of opens is working (otherwise you'd see 0%, not 5%). 

However, a different view may be that your CTAs are simply not compelling or visible enough.  If you have the ability to reach any of the audience through a different channel (i.e. phone), it might be worth finding out why they aren't clicking through.

Cheers

Jo

[Grégoire_Miche2]

Hi Jo,

While your open rates might be inflated (but they may not if people aren't loading images), It is reasonable to assume that tracking of opens is working (otherwise you'd see 0%, not 5%).

You know it's working, but you can also be sure the number is wrong. If can be totally off the mark if you are addressing medium to large companies with antivirus software, that will all download the images and trigger an "open" event. The validity of the open is only to check how it evolves over time or how it compares between 2 email addressing the same targets.

And to be complete, the click detection also tend to become seriously tempered with by the anti phising / link scanners. read this: [Shared Blog]: I Want to Believe, But: Your Email Link Clicks Aren’t Real and vote here:

-Greg

[Jo_Pitts1]

Greg,

Grégoire Michel wrote:

Hi Jo,

While your open rates might be inflated (but they may not if people aren't loading images), It is reasonable to assume that tracking of opens is working (otherwise you'd see 0%, not 5%).

You know it's working, but you can also be sure the number is wrong. If can be totally off the mark if you are addressing medium to large companies with antivirus software, that will all download the images and trigger an "open" event. The validity of the open is only to check how it evolves over time or how it compares between 2 email addressing the same targets.

I completely agree with you hence why I acknowledged that the numbers might be inflated.  I was just concerned that everyone was ignoring the elephant in the room - namely a poor CTA is a poor CTA is a poor CTA .  It is easy to get wrapped up in the technology aspects of a problem and ignore the human side of it.

cheers

Jo

[Grégoire_Miche2]

Hi Jo,

I acknowledged that the numbers might be inflated

In fact, you don't even know this for sure On average, you are right, but in detail and for a specific vendor, because averages can hide very disparate situations, it totally depends on your target and the kind of email clients they are using, and the kind of anti-virus they are using. It can be deflated too.

You can assume that a target of large companies will be well equipped with anti-virus software and will give you an inflated number, while a target of senior B2C people using Outlook will give a deflated number.

-Greg

[Jamie_Barclay]

Hi Greg, can you elaborate on this... not quite sure what you mean.  How would Outlook give a deflated reporting on click rates?

In fact, you don't even know this for sure On average, you are right, but in detail and for a specific vendor, because averages can hide very disparate situations, it totally depends on your target and the kind of email clients they are using, and the kind of anti-virus they are using. It can be deflated too.

You can assume that a target of large companies will be well equipped with anti-virus software and will give you an inflated number, while a target of senior B2C people using Outlook will give a deflated number.

[Dan_Stevens_]

can you elaborate on this... not quite sure what you mean.  How would Outlook give a deflated reporting on click rates?

Greg was probably referring to open rates, not click-thru rates.  The reason why the numbers would be deflated is because Outlook, by default, does not load images within emails.  You need images turned on in order for the tracking pixel to register with the email server.

[SanfordWhiteman]

How would Outlook give a deflated reporting on click rates?

Deflated reporting on Opens.

[Anonymous]

It is a bit ambiguous to look at CTRs across the board.  If you are curious about standards I would look for reports within your industry/niche.  I agree that if you have a great open rate and a low CTR your CTA may not be matching your subject line in the emails.  The flip side, though, is if the low CTR people convert to your offers at a high rate than perhaps you are only pulling the hottest leads down through the funnel with your email marketing message.

Do you use any of the scoring features in Marketo or in your CRM to ascertain how MQL ready or sales ready the people receiving these emails are?

[Josh_G]

Hey Jamie,
As you're probably aware, there are a lot of variables that contribute to setting an accurate baseline for comparing CTRs.

That being said, in your own analysis, take the open rates with a grain of salt.

Open rates are notorious for becoming inflated.

Opens are tracked based on a pixel load, and many email browsers load emails as they arrive in the inbox regardless of if the user wanted to "open" them or not.

There are also anti-spam services that pre-check emails prior to delivery that could result in opens.

[Tom_Kerlin2]

Open rates could also be an indicator of how optimized your subject lines are.

[Jamie_Barclay]

Thanks Josh,
I am aware of these issues.  However in terms of the anti-spam service prechecking I also ran a smart list and the number of actual people in our database that open email aligns to the open rate in the email performance report.

I also know that really open rates don't reflect those that may have clicked through so open or click = true open rate.  So the open rate in the reporting in my experience is underreported.  I'm wondering if there's a gitch on the Marketo side that is underreporting click-to-opens.  Something is off given the CTA would drive people to learn more.

[SanfordWhiteman]

"actual people" and anti-malware/anti-phishing scanners can't be distinguished using this method, Jamie. That's the very idea behind security scanners.

[Tom_Kerlin2]

Hi Jamie,

If the CTA in your email is using a tokenized url then double check to make sure it's set up for successful tracking.

Here's an older thread that might help: Can you use URLs in Tokens? YES - here's how.

-Tom

[Jamie_Barclay]

Tom thank you for that insightful thread.  Just wondering are you suggesting that the links will track better/more accurately if we use a token vs. embedding the URL in the email?  Thank you

[Tom_Kerlin2]

Sure no problem - I was just pointing out a common error people make when tokenizing their urls in emails, but it doesn't make much of a difference tracking-wise whether you use tokens or just embed the URL directly in the email. Just make sure you enable tracking in the WYSIWYG editor

.

[SanfordWhiteman]

... it matters if you include the http/s:// in the token, though, since that will make the link untracked.

[Jamie_Barclay]

thanks Sanford - I was aware of this. 
http/s:// in the token, though, since that will make the link untracked

Appreciate everyone's feedback - I still think there may be an issue.  Will continue to assess.