Comparing paid and organic sources fairly
Paid and organic traffic look different by design. A fair source comparison respects that difference instead of forcing one leaderboard.
Organic installs often arrive later and cost less in cash, but they still consume product and support time. Paid installs arrive faster and carry media cost. Putting both on a single cost-per-install chart without noting those differences invites the wrong budget cut.
A clearer approach is a two-axis view: cash cost on one side, quality signals on the other. Quality might mean day-7 retention, first-session depth, or revenue within 14 days. Then each source earns a short narrative: “expensive but sticky,” “cheap but shallow,” or “balanced.”
Referral and partner links deserve their own row. They are neither classic paid nor pure organic, and collapsing them into “other” hides whether a partnership is earning its keep.
When your team disagrees in a meeting, ask everyone to state the comparison rule before debating the numbers. Agreeing on the rule—cash cost plus day-7 retention, for example—shortens arguments more than any new chart.