omtrdc.net: ten companies, zero classified trackers
omtrdc.net is where Adobe Analytics sends its measurement beacons — the collection endpoint that used to belong to Omniture, whose abbreviated name is still in the domain. If a large organisation runs Adobe's marketing suite, this is the hostname doing the reporting, and it appears in a network log with no branding attached to explain itself. This index has no vendor catalogue entry for it, and the consequence shows up in the first two numbers on the page: across the 59 sites of 5,294 where it appeared, the median page contacted 10 companies and had 0 of them classified as tracking.
Zero is a fact about the catalogue, not about the page
A median tracker count of 0 ranks 87th of the 88 companies in this index, where rank 1 is the highest. It does not mean these pages are clean. It means the hostnames they contact are mostly not in the vendor catalogue that classification depends on, and a domain with no entry cannot be classified as tracking or as anything else. omtrdc.net is itself one of those domains.
The count of companies is the number that survives this. Ten companies on the median page ranks 35th of 88, over 35 requests. So the honest description of a typical page here is not 'no trackers'. It is 'ten separate companies contacted, and the classifier has an opinion about none of them'.
The co-presence list is one company's estate under four names
demdex.net was present on 43 of the 59 sites (72.9%), adobedtm.com on 32 (54.2%) and everesttech.net on 21 (35.6%). Those are Adobe's audience, tag-management and advertising hostnames respectively, and not one of them contains the word Adobe. Together with omtrdc.net they are the four ways the same suite shows up in a request log.
After those three the list thins out fast: Google on 19 sites (32.2%), OneTrust on 16 (27.1%), go-mpulse.net on 12 (20.3%), akstat.io and trustarc.com on 7 each (11.9%), amazon.com on 5 (8.5%) and Google Tag Manager on 5 (8.5%). Google is on under a third of these pages, which fits the profile: organisations that bought one vendor's suite and standardised on it rather than assembling a page from whatever was free.
55 of 59 sites had early contact
On 55 sites — 93.2%, ranking 49th of 88 — at least one company was contacted before a consent banner could have been answered. The median count inside that window was 6 companies, with 2 more appearing after it closed.
Median time to first contact was 793 ms, which ranks 21st of 88 on a scale where rank 1 is the slowest, so these pages start reaching outward later than most in this index. The quickest first contact recorded here was 195 ms. As everywhere in this corpus, the early-contact count is per site and carries no names, so it places nothing in particular inside the window.
Fewer than half showed a banner
Consent software was detected on 26 of the 59 sites: OneTrust seen alongside on 16, the IAB TCF framework on 8 and Usercentrics on 2. Sites can carry more than one, so these are sightings rather than divisions of the 26.
One detail from the co-presence list sits next to this and is worth noticing without over-reading: trustarc.com, another consent vendor's hostname, was contacted on 7 of these sites. Contacting a consent vendor's domain and presenting a banner the crawl can identify are two different events, and this index records them separately.
The named sites are institutions, not publishers
fidelity.com contacted 13 companies with only 2 inside the window, first contact at 1,447 ms, behind a OneTrust banner. hbr.org: 20 with 16, behind an IAB TCF banner. hostgator.com: 16 with 15, first contact at 195 ms behind OneTrust. bluehost.com: 15 with 9. as.com: 17 and 17 at 270 ms. elpais.com: 13 with 10. mysql.com: 11 with 8 at 1,226 ms. avast.com: 10 with 9. amazonaws.com, the highest-ranked site in the sample, contacted 6 with 4 at 1,021 ms; dyndns.org the same 6 with 4, at 1,437 ms. ancestry.com: 5 and 5. worldbank.org is the lightest at 3 companies, all 3 inside the window, first contact at 680 ms.
Banks, hosting companies, newspapers, a development institution. Adobe's suite is sold to organisations with procurement departments, and the sites in this sample look exactly like that.
| Site | Companies | Before consent | First contact |
|---|---|---|---|
| amazonaws.com | 6 | 4 | 1021 ms |
| avast.com | 10 | 9 | 632 ms |
| hostgator.com | 16 | 15 | 195 ms |
| mysql.com | 11 | 8 | 1226 ms |
| bluehost.com | 15 | 9 | 655 ms |
| elpais.com | 13 | 10 | 482 ms |
| dyndns.org | 6 | 4 | 1437 ms |
| hbr.org | 20 | 16 | 554 ms |
| worldbank.org | 3 | 3 | 680 ms |
| fidelity.com | 13 | 2 | 1447 ms |
| ancestry.com | 5 | 5 | 941 ms |
| as.com | 17 | 17 | 270 ms |
| Tool | Sites |
|---|---|
| OneTrust | 16 |
| IAB TCF consent tool | 8 |
| Usercentrics | 2 |
Seen on the same pages
Companies most often contacted by the same sites. Co-presence only — the crawl records what arrived, not who called whom.
- demdex.netTogether on 43 of these sites
- adobedtm.comTogether on 32 of these sites
- everesttech.netTogether on 21 of these sites
- GoogleTogether on 19 of these sites
- OneTrustTogether on 16 of these sites
- go-mpulse.netTogether on 12 of these sites
- akstat.ioTogether on 7 of these sites
- trustarc.comTogether on 7 of these sites
Questions
What is omtrdc.net?
Adobe's analytics data-collection hostname, inherited from Omniture. It receives measurement beacons from pages running Adobe Analytics. This index has no catalogue entry for it, so it is counted as a contacted company but carries no category or tracking classification here.
Why does the median page show zero trackers?
Because classification requires a vendor catalogue entry and most hostnames on these pages, including this one, do not have one. The pages still contacted a median of 10 companies. Read the company count, not the tracker count, on entities like this.
Is this the same as demdex.net or adobedtm.com?
They are separate hostnames within the same vendor's suite, doing different jobs — collection, audience, tag management. In this sample demdex.net was on 43 of the 59 sites and adobedtm.com on 32, so they travel together but are not interchangeable.
Do these sites contact fewer companies than most?
Slightly. Ten companies over 35 requests puts them 35th and 61st of the 88 companies broken out here — mid-table on companies, on the lighter side for request volume.