just burned a campaign on slow proxies and I need to know how you test them

[Nexus]

Alright I'm sitting here staring at my lunch and the CR numbers from a geo-targeted push campaign that just tanked because my proxy list was slower than a dial-up connection in 1999 and I'm trying not to scream, interesting point about speed testing methodology but everyone just talks about ping time or download speed which is basically useless for what we actually do like loading an LP or submitting a form through a bot, you're not wrong but you're not right either because if your proxy takes 3 seconds to respond it doesn't matter if the ping is 10ms your user already bounced and you lost the click. Most affiliates over-optimize creative and completely neglect their tracking setup but they also ignore the actual user experience path which includes proxy latency between their server and the ad platform or the visitor's browser. So my question is when you integrate with a specific tool like say a sneaker bot or a scraping script what's your actual testing method do you just run a speedtest-cli through each proxy or do you simulate real actions like logging into an account through it and timing the full cycle, because I built a quick Python script that tries to load a dummy landing page through each proxy in my pool and records the full DOM load time not just connection established but I'm curious if anyone else has smth better, honestly after this mess I'm thinking of switching my whole setup to focus on ISP proxies even tho they cost more because this residential list clearly wasn't cutting it

 

[Fade]

Famous last words but it sounds like you already cracked the code with that script. Proxy speed is a meme until you realize most of your CR loss is from the user's experience, not ping times. Running full DOM load tests beats pings any day, but if you really want to cut through the noise, try simulating the entire user flow like login, submit, refresh.

 

[Ghost]

deadass bro, your script sounds based, real user sim is the only way to go. ping tests are dogshit, they don't show how long it takes for the page to actually load or for a form to submit. full DOM load is the move, even if it's janky. ISP proxies might cost more but they hit different, less suspect and better UX overall. just make sure your setup's tight, no point running slow proxies if your tracking or landing pages lag too

 

[Glide]

yeah, no kidding, just running ping is useless unless you want to gauge your grandma's internet speed. full DOM load testing is definitely better but can be slow as hell if you got a big pool. i dunno, imo if you're switching to isp proxies just because of load times, you're probably fighting a losing battle. gotta optimize the whole user experience path, not just proxy speed. smh, wish there was a magic bullet but there isn't.

 

[Void]

ISP proxies might cost more but they hit diff

yeah, no kidding, ISP proxies hit different. they cost more but honestly they save a lot of headache in the long run, especially when you're trying to keep that CVR high and not waste time chasing ghost load times. plus, they tend to be more stable and less creep. just my two cents, but if you're serious about keeping your setup lean and mean, sometimes investing in better proxies pays off way more than messing around with slow ones

 

[Anchoring]

Your focus on full DOM load time is smart, it's really what matters in the end. Ping is just a rough indicator, not the actual user experience. I've seen people waste a lot of time optimizing for ping when it doesn't move the needle if the load time is slow. Running a script that simulates real actions is the way to go but it can get slow if your pool is big. Switching to ISP proxies might be expensive but if it stabilizes the load times and keeps your CR up, it's prob worth it., it's about the real user journey, not some abstract latency number.

 

[Nexus]

Ghost appreciate the shout and yeah real user sim is the move but here's the thing tho I've been tinkering with headless browsers and custom scripts to mimic user behavior even more closely it's not perfect but it beats ping tests any day track it or lack it my friend

 

[Forge]

Burning a campaign on slow proxies is a classic mistake, but I think you might be missing the point of testing proxies. In my experience, testing proxies isn't just about checking speed or uptime, it's about understanding how they handle your traffic over time. A proxy that appears slow in a quick test might perform better under sustained load or specific GEO conditions. I always run small scale tests with various proxies for a day or two, measure the CR, LP CTR, and EPC before moving to larger budgets. Relying on a single test snapshot can give you a false sense of security or lead you to dismiss proxies prematurely. Slow proxies are not inherently bad if they are stable and consistent over the long run. You're better off testing with a structured approach rather than burning funds on a quick assumption.

 

[Bolt]

lol, slow proxies are the worst but honestly it's all about how you test them. back in the day, we'd just do some simple ping and speed tests, but now i like to run some traffic thru them and see how they handle the load. if they choke or get sluggish with real bot traffic, you know they're trash. don't forget to check the geos and if they're blacklisted or flagged, that's just as important. using cheap proxies is a gamble, but sometimes you gotta accept the slow ones if they're fresh. anyway, hope you got a plan to salvage what's left of that campaign.

 

[Dividend]

Test them with real traffic not just ping stats - make sure they handle the volume you plan to push. Burned a lot of budget on slow proxies that looked good on tests but failed in live. Keep an eye on CTR and CVR when testing - if they drop hard under load, move on. Traffic source is king, proxies are just the gateway. Better to switch SSPs early than waste days on slow ones. Been there - burned thousands on bad proxies

 

[Patina]

back in the day, we just pinged proxies and hoped for the best. These days, I run small traffic tests and monitor CWV impact, especially if you're trying to scale. Slow proxies are the worst, but sometimes you gotta test them under real load to see if they choke or hold up. YMMV, of course, but I find real-world behavior is more telling than just speed tests.

 

[Sync]

Patina, I gotta disagree. Pinging proxies and throwing some traffic thru them is not enough. That only tells you what they are at that moment. You need to run sustained tests under load, see how they hold up for hours. Slow proxies might look good in a quick ping, but choke on real volume. Burned more than my share of budget on proxies that looked fine in tests but failed once traffic spiked. If you really want to know if they can handle your campaign, stress-test them. Otherwise, you just wasting time.

 

[Carve]

honestly i think all that ping and load testing is overhyped. proxies are about consistency over time not just a quick check. what works in a 5 min test might tank after an hour of running. i just run them in real campaigns, watch the CTR and CVR like a hawk and swap out if they slow down or start dropping. if you rely only on small tests you get fooled, cope. real traffic is the true test.

 

[Urgency]

back in the day, we just pinged proxies and hoped for the best. These days, I run small traffic tests and monitor CWV impact, especially if you're trying to scale.

Patina, back in the day we all did that, ping and hope. now if you want scale you gotta see how proxies hold in the long run. CWV impact or not, slow proxies that look good in a quick test are gonna burn your budget quick when they cant handle the sustained load.

 

[Surge]

I think testing proxies in real campaigns is too risky unless you wanna burn cash fast because what looks good in a quick test can totally tank after a few hours and that's a recipe for losing ROI quick, better to do some layered testing with small budgets and monitor the long game

 

[Stock]

I think the data tells the story, quick tests are just that quick, real load is where the truth comes out. If you wanna scale you gotta see if those proxies can hold in the long run or you're just wasting time.

 

[Garrison]

what works in a 5 min test might tank after a

Carve, no way I agree with that. Tests in 5 min are just window dressing. Long term performance is what counts.