How to Build Real-Time Attribution for DTC (Instead of Buying It)

The Setup

Every DTC operator has been sold the same promise: buy a SaaS attribution tool, plug it in, and suddenly you'll know which ads are driving revenue. The reality is different. Most off-the-shelf attribution platforms give you last-click data, maybe a multi-touch model, and a monthly invoice that scales with your revenue. They tell you what happened. They rarely tell you why, and almost never at the granularity needed to make real-time scaling decisions.

The conventional approach — Triple Whale, Northbeam, Rockerbox — works fine when you're running one brand, one traffic source, and one currency. But when you're managing a multi-product portfolio across multiple affiliate sources, running subscription rebills alongside one-time purchases, processing in two currencies, and making daily CPA decisions on $100K+ in ad spend, the off-the-shelf tools hit their ceiling. They can't cross-reference affiliate payout data with product-level refund rates by SKU variant by month.

The alternative is building it yourself. Not from scratch — but on top of infrastructure you already control. The data from one DTC operation shows what that looks like: 15 structured data views across 7 attribution dimensions, tracking $1.08M in gross revenue across 38 products and 14 traffic sources over 28 months.

What the Data Shows

According to a 2024 Measured study, 65% of DTC brands report that their attribution data doesn't match their actual revenue within a 15% margin. The gap between what the dashboard says and what the bank account shows is the most expensive blind spot in performance marketing.

Forrester's 2023 marketing measurement survey found that brands spending over $1M annually on paid media waste an average of 26% of budget due to misattribution — either over-investing in channels that appear profitable but aren't, or under-investing in channels that are profitable but appear marginal.

The Stealth Labz attribution system, built on Konnektive CRM with custom reporting exports, tracks revenue across 7 dimensions: product (38 families, 100+ SKU variants), affiliate (14 tracked sources), campaign (38+ funnels), time (28 months), transaction type (initial, rebill, refund), currency (ZAR and USD), and payout (affiliate cost per offer per source). These aren't one-time data pulls. They're repeatable queries against the production transaction database.

What this looks like in practice: when PRD-01 generated $542,356 in gross revenue, the system could show that the refund rate was 6.0% ($32,535), the rebill-to-initial ratio was 8.7% ($43,318), and that AFF-01 drove approximately 59% of portfolio revenue during the peak period — all decomposed by month, by SKU variant, by transaction type.

The system answered questions most DTC operators at this revenue level cannot ask: Which affiliate source has the highest refund rate per product? What is the rebill-to-initial ratio by SKU variant by month? When exactly did each traffic source go dark, and what was the revenue impact per product line?

How It Works

The attribution system operates on three principles that differentiate it from SaaS alternatives.

Principle 1: Build on owned infrastructure. The 15 data views are structured exports from Konnektive CRM — the same system processing transactions. There is no sync lag between the transaction database and the reporting layer. New months, new products, and new affiliates flow into the same attribution structure automatically. The person making product decisions has direct access to the unit economics informing those decisions. No intermediary. No delayed reporting.

Principle 2: Attribution at the intersection, not the aggregate. Most tools show revenue by product OR revenue by affiliate OR revenue by month. The Stealth Labz system shows revenue by product x affiliate x month with initial/rebill/refund splits per SKU variant. A single data row tells you: AFF-03 drove 193 initial orders of the PRD-01 single-bottle subscription, generating $9,611 in initial revenue; 24 customers rebilled for $1,140 (12.4% rebill rate); 3 customers refunded for $153 (1.6% refund rate on gross). Multiply that granularity across 14 affiliates, 100+ SKU variants, and 28 months.

Principle 3: Decision-layer, not reporting-layer. The attribution system directly informed the product launch discipline documented across the portfolio. The operator could see within 30-60 days whether a new product had traction or needed to be killed. The PRD-01 decline was visible in real time because the system showed exactly when AFF-01 traffic dropped, which products were affected, and what the refund dynamics looked like during the decline. The affiliate dependency was quantifiable because every dollar was tagged to its source.

What This Means for DTC Operators

If you're spending $50K+/month on media and your attribution tool can't tell you the refund rate by product by traffic source, you're flying blind on the metrics that actually determine ROAS. The real ROAS isn't revenue / ad spend. It's (initial revenue + rebill revenue - refunds - affiliate payouts) / total acquisition cost, decomposed by source, by product, by month.

Building attribution on owned infrastructure costs less than most SaaS attribution tools charge annually — and it produces data at a granularity those tools cannot match. The tradeoff is that you need the technical infrastructure to build it. But if you're already running Konnektive, Everflow, or any CRM with structured export capability, the components are already there. The question is whether you've connected them into a system that answers the questions your business actually needs answered.

---

Related: [C8_S173: 15 Attribution Views Across 7 Dimensions] | [C8_S165: Scale DTC Brand from $100K to $2M/Month] | [C8_S168: Managing $100K/Day in Ad Spend]

References

1. Measured (2024). "Attribution Accuracy Study." Revenue-to-attribution gap analysis across DTC brands.
2. Forrester (2023). "Marketing Measurement Survey." Budget waste from misattribution in paid media.
3. Keating, M.G. (2026). "Case Study: The Revenue Attribution System." Stealth Labz. Read case study
4. Keating, M.G. (2026). "The Compounding Execution Method: Complete Technical Documentation." Stealth Labz. Browse papers