MMP comparison · · By Cald
Singular vs Tenjin: Specs, Pricing and Reviews
Both connect acquisition to monetization. Compare the cost-reconciliation workload, game revenue pipeline and export operations.
Evaluate Singular first for a cost-data consolidation brief; evaluate Tenjin first for a lean game-monetization brief. That is our editorial starting hypothesis. Both support acquisition and ad-revenue analysis, so choosing solely on whether a vendor “does ROAS” misses the operational difference.
This guide uses official documentation and public review material checked October 30, 2026. We have not conducted a controlled accuracy benchmark. Documented specifications, individual reviewer experiences and our interpretation are identified separately below.
Specs: compare the revenue path, not just the chart
| Requirement | Singular | Tenjin |
|---|---|---|
| Ad-revenue analysis | Documents aggregate monetization reporting and user-level revenue attribution to acquisition cohorts. | Documents SDK-collected mediation revenue and combined ad-revenue/IAP cohort metrics. |
| Mediation inputs | Lists integrations including MAX, LevelPlay and AdMob; verify the required dataset. | Lists MAX, LevelPlay, AdMob and other providers; requires a supporting SDK integration. |
| Warehouse workflow | Marketing ETL supports monetization datasets with separate aggregate and user-level schemas. | Raw Data Exporter supplies event CSVs and API access; your team owns storage and processing. |
| Export operations | Confirm the selected destination, dataset cadence and contractual entitlement. | Export datasets cover up to 30 days; current API release notes distinguish download-file expiry from query range. |
| Partner feedback | Verify the exact revenue-sharing configuration with each optimization partner. | Documents forwarding impression-level revenue to supported ad networks through revenue callbacks. |
Sources: Singular ad monetization, Tenjin mediation ROI, Tenjin raw exporter and Tenjin API release notes. These sources describe availability, not guaranteed compatibility with every app configuration.
Where the implementation differs
Singular: separate aggregate revenue from attributed revenue
Singular’s reporting FAQ describes an Unattributed Ad Revenue option for comparing attributed ad revenue with aggregate monetization revenue at the same breakdown. That is a useful diagnostic when the publisher’s earnings total and acquisition-cohort revenue differ. Reporting FAQ.
Our inference: make this the first demo if your team spends substantial time explaining revenue mismatches across partners. Ask the operator to show the source total, attributed portion and remaining difference. A joined total is useful only when the team understands what failed to join and why.
Tenjin: plan the collection and export jobs together
Tenjin’s mediation guide makes SDK support a prerequisite for receiving the impression-level revenue feed. A connected mediation account alone does not establish that the expected event stream reaches the acquisition report. Mediation setup requirements.
Its API release notes dated August 7, 2026 say generated export files expire 24 hours after creation. That is different from the raw exporter’s maximum 30-day dataset range. Schedule download, ingestion and retry monitoring accordingly; verify the response’s expiry field in your integration. Export lifecycle change.
Our inference: Tenjin deserves the first hands-on evaluation for a small studio whose daily question is which acquisition cohort earns back its spend. Include the engineer who will own mediation callbacks and export retrieval. A simple reporting screen can still require reliable plumbing behind it.
Pricing and commercial scope
Singular lists Growth at $0.05/conversion, a free 15,000-paid-conversion offering and quoted Enterprise plans. Automated ETL is optional; confirm the allowance period and required monetization modules.
Tenjin lists 2,000 free paid-attributed installs/month, then $0.04 each. Its $200/month S plan includes 10,000 conversions; confirm overages and data-access terms.
Neither line is a complete proposal. Ask both vendors to mark which acquisition activities are billable, what organic activity costs, and how re-engagement is treated. Include apps, platforms, exports, support and the actual ad-revenue configuration. Price expected volume and a growth scenario using the same forecast.
Do not assume a lower published unit rate means a lower operating cost. Include internal time to reconcile partner revenue, maintain export ingestion and investigate missing cohorts. Treat managed delivery and a file-download API as different delivery responsibilities when estimating implementation effort.
What third-party reviewers report
Singular: July 2026 gaming reviews on G2 value combined campaign data and cohort reporting; one also describes setup complexity and a learning curve for advanced views. Singular review material.
Tenjin: G2 users praise consolidated acquisition reporting and responsive support; some describe iOS setup difficulties, initial learning effort or higher cost beyond plan limits. Tenjin reviews.
These are experiences from different teams, not a matched benchmark. Reviews can mix product versions, contract tiers and invited respondents. We do not treat a reviewer’s praise for accuracy as proof of attribution accuracy, or a difficult setup as proof that everyone encounters the same problem.
Turn the feedback into an operator exercise: have your marketer build a cohort report, your analyst explain an unattributed remainder, and your engineer retrieve a raw sample. Record vendor assistance and unresolved steps. Ask for support escalation terms rather than assuming the review experience is contractual.
Worked pilot: one impression, one purchase, two revenue views
Synthetic example: a game earns from rewarded ads and in-app purchases. The team wants D7 cohort revenue to include both, while keeping publisher earnings and acquisition attribution understandable. The following test is an illustrative acceptance plan, not a client result.
| Record | Exact trigger | Required context |
|---|---|---|
ad_impression_revenue | Mediation SDK confirms a revenue-bearing impression, once per impression ID. | Event ID, impression ID where available, app/platform, mediation provider, placement, numeric revenue, currency, UTC time. |
iap_payment_verified | Backend verifies a settled purchase, once per store transaction ID. | Transaction ID, event ID, product ID, permitted customer context, numeric revenue, currency, UTC time. |
- Fix revenue meaning: document gross versus net, fees, tax and currency conversion. Retain source values so a normalized comparison can be reproduced.
- Verify both paths: generate a test impression and a settled purchase. Acceptance: each appears once in the appropriate supported report, with the expected amount and currency.
- Prevent double collection: inspect whether SDK, mediation API or server delivery overlap. Replay a purchase retry; acceptance is one counted transaction under your documented deduplication design.
- Explain the remainder: compare aggregate mediation earnings with attributed cohort earnings at aligned dimensions. Acceptance: every known exclusion or unavailable attribution is recorded, rather than silently discarded.
- Test the cohort: distinguish revenue generated on a calendar date from revenue earned by users acquired on that date. Align timezone, attribution window and cohort age.
- Exercise exports: ingest a sample into your intended destination and simulate a delayed download. Confirm recovery before the applicable file expires.
For iOS, ask both vendors to identify observed, aggregate and modeled data separately. Do not add overlapping attribution reports or expect unrestricted customer-level matching from Apple privacy signals. A candidate passes only when your required networks, monetization inputs and downstream fields work in the proposed package.
Singular or Tenjin: which should you evaluate first?
Take a four-step quiz and watch the fit forecast change with each answer. This is our editorial routing model, not a product benchmark. Your answers stay in this page and are not stored or submitted.
Your evaluation starting point
How this quiz makes a recommendation
The live forecast divides the points from answered questions between the contenders. Before weighted answers, shares are evenly split. These shares are not winning probabilities. Business-pattern points are our editorial hypotheses about where to begin a demo. They are not ratings of accuracy, quality or exclusive capabilities.
| Pattern | Singular | Tenjin |
|---|---|---|
| A mobile app with a broad acquisition brief | 1 | 0 |
| An ad-supported mobile game | 1 | 3 |
| A customer journey spanning website and app | 1 | 0 |
| A team consolidating many ad accounts and spend sources | 3 | 1 |
| None of these, or still deciding | 0 | 0 |
The workflow question adds 3 points for its matching evaluation focus: campaign links → AppsFlyer; operations and callbacks → Adjust; cost normalization → Singular; web-to-app → Airbridge; lean game monetization → Tenjin. A focus outside this pair and “no single workflow” add no points. The higher total is evaluated first; equal totals recommend piloting both. The buying constraint changes the demo task, not the ranking. Mandatory requirements can override the result. Website-only answers bypass the comparison.