Skip to main content

Dianomi vs Sharethrough

Last verified Nov 11, 2026

At a glance

  • Dianomi scores 3.7/5 and Sharethrough scores 3.5/5 in Benchmark Grid's independent native ad networks benchmark, both assessed on the same 9 criteria.
  • The widest gaps are reader experience & page speed (Dianomi 3.2, Sharethrough 4.4) and commercial terms transparency (Dianomi 1.8, Sharethrough 2.6); they are within 0.3 on 5 of 9 criteria.
  • Both are built for mid-market and enterprise publishers.
  • On total cost of ownership Dianomi scores 2.2 and Sharethrough 2.5 (higher means better value, not a lower price).
  • In our tracking 13 publishers use Dianomi and 22 use Sharethrough.
  • Scores last verified 11 Nov 2026. Vendors cannot pay for a score or a position.

Where they differ

Dianomi is stronger on privacy & standards compliance (4.0 vs 3.2) and reporting, reconciliation & payout reliability (3.0 vs 2.4).

Sharethrough is stronger on reader experience & page speed (4.4 vs 3.2) and commercial terms transparency (2.6 vs 1.8).

Which one fits

Choose Dianomi if…

  • You publish at mid-market and enterprise scale.
  • You weight privacy & standards compliance, reporting, reconciliation & payout reliability and ad quality & content standards heavily — Dianomi leads on those in this benchmark.

Choose Sharethrough if…

  • You publish at mid-market and enterprise scale.
  • You weight reader experience & page speed and commercial terms transparency heavily — Sharethrough leads on those in this benchmark.

Also weighing these

The nearest-scored tools to Dianomi and Sharethrough in this benchmark, listed A to Z.

All 10 scored tools are in Best Native Ad Networks for Publishers.

Who uses them

Publishers we have detected running each tool, from ads.txt, site code and published case studies. Agencies, brands and vendors are excluded.

Head to head

CriterionDianomiSharethrough
Revenue yield & demand quality16% of capability4.24.2
Ad quality & content standards12% of capability4.03.8
Publisher control over placements12% of capability3.03.0
Recommendation widget performance12% of capability3.03.0
Commercial terms transparency10% of capability1.82.6
Formats & integration10% of capability4.34.3
Reader experience & page speed10% of capability3.24.4
Reporting, reconciliation & payout reliability10% of capability3.02.4
Privacy & standards compliance8% of capability4.03.2
Capability45% of composite3.43.5
Publisher fit40% of composite4.54.0
Total cost of ownership15% of composite2.22.5

Cost of ownership

Sub-scoreDianomiSharethrough
Pricing transparency0.80.9
Entry cost2.10.9
Implementation cost2.54.0
Hidden-fee risk3.04.0
Ongoing cost2.52.7

Dianomi pricing

Performance-based pricing typically using CPC (Cost Per Click) or CPV (Cost Per View) models; publishers operate on a revenue-share basis.

Sharethrough pricing

Standard SSP fee/rev-share

What users say

Dianomi

11 positive · 11 neutral · 0 negative

Sharethrough

13 positive · 7 neutral · 4 negative

Mentions we could not tie to a real user, and those flagged as promotional, are excluded. Sentiment is opinion, and is independent of the verified publisher adoptions above.

Dianomi scores 3.7 and Sharethrough scores 3.5 in Benchmark Grid's independent Best Native Ad Networks for Publishers benchmark (benchmarkgrid.com/vs/dianomi/sharethrough, verified Nov 11, 2026)

Common questions

How do Dianomi and Sharethrough differ?

Dianomi is stronger on privacy & standards compliance (4.0 vs 3.2) and reporting, reconciliation & payout reliability (3.0 vs 2.4). Sharethrough is stronger on reader experience & page speed (4.4 vs 3.2) and commercial terms transparency (2.6 vs 1.8). Neither is better in the abstract — which one suits you depends on which of those dimensions carries the most weight in your operation.

Which is cheaper, Dianomi or Sharethrough?

On total cost of ownership — pricing transparency, entry cost, implementation, hidden-fee risk and ongoing cost — Dianomi scores 2.2/5 and Sharethrough scores 2.5/5. A higher score means better value, not a lower sticker price.

How are these scores calculated?

Each tool is assessed against its category's published criteria (9 in this benchmark), which make up Capability (45% of the composite), Publisher fit (40%) and Total cost of ownership (15%). Assessment is carried out by SODP's editorial team against a published methodology. Vendors cannot pay for inclusion, scores or positions.

Share:

Both tools are scored in Best Native Ad Networks for Publishers. See alternatives to Dianomi or alternatives to Sharethrough.

Weighing a third option? Add a tool to this comparison.

Related comparisons

Other head-to-heads publishers look at in Best Native Ad Networks for Publishers.

Choose Your NetworkWhich native ad network is best for small publishers?