This post is adapted from the recent ARtillry Intelligence Briefing, AR Business Models: The Top of the Food Chain, Part II. It includes some of its data and takeaways. More can be previewed here and subscribe for the full report.


Like Niantic, Snap is one of mobile AR’s early leaders. Social lenses and selfie masks have become synonymous with AR. And though Snapchat and Pokémon Go get flak for not being “true AR,” it doesn’t matter: they’ve done AR a favor by acclimating the world as its “gateway drug.”

Snapchat has intelligently treated that AR engagement as a monetization opportunity, such as branded AR Lenses. This has vaulted it as an early leader in AR monetization, in addition to penetration and usage. In fact, it currently holds a large share of mobile AR advertising revenues.

Segmenting AR revenue by company and applying our bottom-up forecasting methodology (which calculates industry revenues based on current spending and company revenues), we estimate Snapchat’s AR ad revenue to be $236 million of the $428 million spent on AR ads this year.

Short Game

Similar to Facebook, Snapchat’s AR play works on two levels. The first, is to boost its ad revenues by giving advertisers a more engaging format to capture user interest and conversions. And those campaign performance indicators are proving out (explored below).

The second level involves using AR to engage its user base to both attract new users and to grow session lengths for existing users. Those goals lead back to ad revenue, but focus directly on its usage metrics at a time when Snapchat’s user growth continues to slow.

Though Snapchat is an early leader among social networks integrating AR, it is subject to continued competition from Facebook. In the same style that Facebook copied key Snapchat formats like stories, it’s already doing the same with AR lenses, such as its Camera Effects.

Snapchat has responded by opening up its AR platform for developers: Lens Studio. Previously, it limited AR lens development to its own in-house development team. It’s also moved towards more synchronous AR experiences with Snappables, which ads more social AR appeal and use cases.

Snapchat will have to maintain that open attitude if it’s to compete with the volume of AR content and user engagement that Facebook is capable of. Just like Facebook’s copying of other Snapchat formats, it can gain AR market share quickly based on its two billion global users.

Meanwhile, one advantage Snapchat has over Facebook is its relative affinity among Millennials and Generation Z. Facebook, despite its global scale, faces daunting attrition among younger generations, while Snapchat remains strong. This could be where the battle is waged.

Proof Points 

As an example of Snapchat’s AR ads, Foot locker and Jordan Brands recently ran an AR campaign. Using Snapchat’s “Ad to AR” format, users swiped up on a related story to reveal a branded lens. The lens featured an AR animation for a new shoe release and Gatorade flavor.

Specifically, users could launch the AR overlay, which featured the new shoe in an animated sequence placed in their immediate surroundings (video below). The gamified and animated appeal drove an average play time of 45 seconds, and four million total impressions.

Though it wasn’t the case in this campaign, Snapchat’s AR lenses can be integrated with its “shoppable AR” program. This lets advertisers integrate transactional functionality so users can purchase goods right within Snapchat, rather than being bounced to an app or website.

This commerce infusion will be a key evolution in AR advertising, given the potential for lower-funnel, high-intent interactions. As time goes on and advertisers gain greater comfort and skill with AR advertising, better commerce functionality will allow them to take a “full funnel” approach.

As for cost, Ad to AR ads are auctioned at $3 to $8 CPMs, then placed programmatically and targeted to relevant users and affinity groups in Snapchat’s social graph. Using these prices and reported reach, we’ve estimated the cost of the above Foot Locker campaign to be $22,000.

This compares to branded lenses which cost $40,000 per day to run, plus an $8-$20 CPM. The difference between “Ad to AR” and branded lenses is how they’re distributed. The former are delivered through Snap Ads, while the latter are pushed to the lens carousel of targeted users.

Long Game

Snap extended its AR playbook in September with a feature that lets users scan physical items or barcodes with their camera. It then overlays a card showing info about that item or similar ones. That can include price, reviews and a purchase button, all of which flow from Amazon.

That last part is key, as Snapchat has intelligently partnered for better e-commerce functionality. But beyond just ability to transact, it also taps into Amazon’s vast product image database for better object recognition, which means a more functional user experience.

This brings Snap into visual search, a logical extension. It’s is already an early AR leader which has conditioned behavior within a younger user base that already has a high affinity for the camera. Fashion is also in its DNA, making the style/product-hunting use case a natural one.

But more importantly, it’s a natural move because of its monetization potential. Driving commerce is something Snapchat continues to develop such as transaction-enabled AR lenses, and is central to its ability to grow revenue amidst volatile and sometimes-troubled stock performance.

Snapchat’s AR-based revenue so far has been from branded AR lenses, a quickly-growing form of brand advertising as explored above. But as also shown above, visual search will begin to outpace AR lenses and other display-based AR ad formats in terms of revenue growth.

The longer-term play could also be glasses-based. Like Apple, Snapchat is likely planning for that time horizon. Also like Apple, it’s mobile efforts could be a training ground for AR glasses, for both users and developers. Though not AR, Spectacles could have a similar “conditioning” effect.

“That’s the secret strategy or the Trojan horse: How do you get enough sensors in people’s hands at a cheap price or on their face,” Ubiquity 6 CEO Anjney Midha said recently. “That sets them up for very immersive AR experiences or any kind of VR experiences a year or two years from now.”

To continue reading, see ARtillry’s Intelligence Briefing, AR Business Models: The Top of the Food Chain, Part II


For deeper XR data and intelligence, join ARtillry PRO and subscribe to the free AR Insider Weekly newsletter. 

Disclosure: AR Insider has no financial stake in the companies mentioned in this post, nor received payment for its production. Disclosure and ethics policy can be seen here.

Header Image Credit: Snap, Inc.