Websites Using Ezoic

Ezoic is an ad testing and optimisation platform that sits between AdSense and the premium managed networks. It is unusually open — there is no meaningful traffic minimum — which is why it is where a great many sites take their first step beyond AdSense. The publishers below are verified from public advertising records.

What Ezoic is

Ezoic is a Google Certified Publishing Partner that runs continuous multivariate testing on a site's ad layout — placements, densities, sizes — and keeps the arrangement that earns most per visitor. Where Mediavine and Raptive assign a human team to manage your inventory, Ezoic hands you a machine and a dashboard.

That difference explains its position in the market. It is the network publishers move to when AdSense alone is leaving money behind, and the one many leave once they clear 50,000 sessions and qualify for a managed network.

Requirements

• No hard traffic minimum — the most accessible network of the ones we track
• Original content and compliance with Google Publisher Policies
• Willingness to let an algorithm reshape your ad layout, which not every publisher wants

What publishers typically earn

Ezoic reports earnings as EPMV — earnings per thousand visitors — rather than the more common per-thousand-impressions RPM. EPMV counts the whole visit rather than a single pageview, so it is the more honest number, but it also makes Ezoic figures look different from everyone else's. Reported EPMV commonly lands somewhere between $5 and $18, with the usual enormous variation by niche, season and audience country.

How this list is built

Membership is established from public advertising records — the standardised files and tags that networks and publishers maintain so advertisers can confirm who is authorised to sell a site's inventory. Nothing here is self-reported by the site, and nothing is inferred from how a page looks.

Ezoic in particular lists many publishers under several of its regional trading entities, so the raw records overstate the number of sites considerably. We collapse those into one entry per site, which is why our count is lower — and more accurate — than a naive read would give. See our methodology for what we check and what we leave out.

The honest caveat: authorisation records can lag reality slightly when a publisher leaves a network, which is why entries are re-checked over time and carry the date they were last confirmed.

Frequently asked questions