Vector Review (2026)

Vector publishes a full rate card, which in this category is worth acknowledging before anything else. Eight prices, no gate, no contact-us for the entry product.

Every step up costs $200 and buys 2,500 more visitors, so the marginal rate is 8 cents at all three steps. The entry tier charges 16 cents. It is priced at exactly double the vendor's own margin, which is a clean way of saying the smallest plan subsidises the ladder above it.

The number Vector will not publish

Two different things get called a match rate: how much of your traffic gets identified, and how often the identification is right. Vector's own blog says collapsing them is the industry's trick, and that claims of 70 to 80 percent almost always come from conflating them.

Vector is good on the first and silent on the second. On coverage it publishes six figures across six pages.

On accuracy it declines twice, in writing: match rates vary by traffic source and benchmarks get published during onboarding, which is to say after you are in a sales cycle. That is a defensible position and it is also the number a buyer needs before entering one.

Meanwhile Common Room, which resells Vector, tells its own customers that tests show 60 to 75 percent accuracy, and elsewhere puts Vector's coverage at 35 percent — above the top of the range Vector's own help centre gives. So the accuracy figure circulating for this product comes from a company that does not build it, and the vendor that does build it will not confirm one.

The geofence, and the page that does not mention it

Identification is US-only. Vector's help centre says so plainly: for privacy, the pixel is geofenced to the US only, and low volume is usually low US traffic.

The de-anonymisation product page says the opposite — that Vector identifies contacts on your site no matter where they come from. The pricing page mentions no geographic limit at all, though an earlier version of it did, marking every tier as USA only.

What the free credits inside Common Room are worth

Common Room passes through 1,000 Vector credits a month at no cost. Priced at Vector's own published rates that is $960 to $1,915 a year, depending which tier's rate you apply.

The more interesting fact is that Vector does not sell that quantity. Its smallest plan is 2,500 visitors a month, so a Common Room customer who exhausts the free thousand cannot buy a thousand more. The next purchasable step is $399 a month for two and a half times the volume.

Set the two side by side and the pass-through stops looking like a reason to choose either. Common Room's entry is $30,000 a year. Vector's own floor is $4,788, for two and a half times the monthly volume, which is 16% of the price. They are not the same product — Common Room aggregates far more than website visitors — but the free credits are worth three to six percent of its subscription, and nobody should buy a signal platform for them.

Against RB2B, whose claim it makes and inverts

Vector's comparison page says it tells you who is on and off your site for less than RB2B. Check it both ways.

Per unit it is true and comfortably so: 8 cents marginal against RB2B's published 25 cents a resolution, which is under a third. Per month it is false at every tier RB2B publishes — Vector's floor is $399 and RB2B's most expensive published plan is $199.

The same page assigns RB2B 25% enrichment, a figure RB2B does not publish. RB2B publishes 15-20% on basic resolution and 35-45% on premium, and it is the only vendor in this category that publishes a match rate at all.

Two things about buying it

The Target tier, which adds ad audiences, starts at $3,000 a month on an annual commitment. That is a $36,000 floor and a threefold step from the top of Reveal, and it converts a monthly commitment into a yearly one.

And the fulfilment policy is short: purchases are final, no refunds for software services, and cancellation needs thirty days' notice before the date you want it to take effect. On a product sold as a monthly commitment, that thirty days is the part to diarise.

A pixel, a fourteen-day trial and a self-serve signup for Reveal. Target requires a conversation.

• Measure your US traffic first, not your total traffic. The geofence is the single biggest determinant of what a tier is worth, and it is absent from the pricing page.
• Ask for the accuracy benchmark before the trial, not during onboarding. The vendor says it publishes one; get it in writing at the stage where it can still change your decision.
• Size the tier on 15-30% of that US traffic, which is the vendor's own help-centre figure rather than the 35% on its comparison page.
• Do not buy the entry tier if you will grow into the next one, because it costs double the marginal rate and the step up is only $200.
• Diarise the thirty-day cancellation notice on the day you sign, since purchases are final and nothing is refunded.

The clearest rate card in this category, with two gaps underneath it and a third-party fog around it.

The gaps: no overage rate is published, only a promise to notify you as you approach a limit and let you upgrade; and the audience meter is described on the pricing page as live synced segments while a help article says exporting one consumes an ad audience credit, a unit that appears nowhere else and has no published allowance.

The fog is worth naming because it is the reason this page exists. The two third-party pages ranking for Vector's price are both wrong in opposite directions. One quotes a rate card eighteen months dead. The other, written by a self-declared competitor, quotes $40,788 a year — which is Target plus a Reveal subscription that Vector's own FAQ says Target already includes.