bevo tracker vs volumm

Any tracker can be spied on if the url is known.

I haven't used either though so can't really say much.

CPV lab would be my choice.

voluum has great support for mobile campaign. I can't find this feature in bevo.
Self-hosted tracker is first option for me to keep everything in control.

The reason why alot of people are talking about Voluum now is because they just recently launched so they have a bunch of paid and unpaid advertising to the bloggers and forums. Obviously if any company put the time and resources into building a technology solution, they want to come in with good buzz, and I think they did a good job in the affiliate market.

Bevo, the tracking platform, launched in 2010. We already have tens of thousands of users using our system so leave most of our marketing towards word of mouth and organic signups.

Feature wise, it's give or take, Bevo has some features voluum doesnt and vice versa. We are constantly building new stuff into the tracker per our user feedback. Our tracking platform is also free and will remain free indefinitely - It's main purpose is to provide a quality, free tracking solution to the affiliate community and acts as a business development tool for our ad exchange.

I can't speak for Voluum's plan, but it appears they are going to be charging pretty soon. This is similar to what HasOffers did in 2010-2011 when they offered their service for free then charged after they built a bit of a userbase. Not a bad approach. The good news for affiliates is that there are plenty of options for them in the market for all price points. Affiliates have Cake, Hasoffers, CPVLab, Voluum and iMobiTrax if they want to pay for their tracking, and Tracking202 and Bevo if they are looking for a free solution. It's really just up to the affiliate and their situation to decide what they want to use.

Good analysis Troy.
If you look at the third party tracking platforms landscape you will see quite a few solutions that have all their top features. Price might be one of them but the main features are pretty much all the same.
However, the approach on how things are done in term of workflow/work process within each platform is what makes (should make) the real difference between each of those platforms. I can only speak for myself, but i'm pretty sure that most of those solutions were built based on internal business requirements and to solve internal struggles first and this is what normally come to light when you use such platforms.
The voluum people come from the domain parking industry. Which means that they have hundred of thousands of domains which generate traffic that need to be monetized based on many parameters such as domain category, keyword, device, geo, city etc.. etc... so i imagine that they first developped voluum as an internal tool for monetization and then packaged it as a product/service that they could sell as a SaaS (software as a service) to affiliates, media buyers. Can we say that the platform is relevant for PPV advertising? yes, probably. But innitially it was built for an other purpose and probably fulfil the initial purpose in a better way.
Bevo - I know little about bevo and troy is here to better explain/display what the software does differently.
TrackingDesk - My company which can compare to Voluum has taken the approach to ease as much as possible the process of workflow/setup for the user. Beyond the preconfiguration of ad networks' custom variables and parameters (site id, keywords, bid price etc...), we are taking the route to api integration with affiliate networks and technologies. To make it short, by simply plugging your affiliate api token in Trackingdesk, the system imports in a few seconds all your tracking links and associated parameters (payouts, category, geo target) as well as conversions.So practically, it means that instead of copy/pasting links and configuring offers in your third party tracking platform, the systm sync it on your behalf so you can quickly add, stop, run new campaigns. Same goes for tracking pixels syntax which often are what stop/prevent users from properly tracking their campaigns. Our background is affiliate marketing and media buying (which explains that trackign multiple offers, ab testing, and the need to automate and quickly get things up and running was at the top of our priority list)

So to sum up, I guess that all the third party tracking platform provide "generally speaking" the same service, but the approach on how things are done and work for the user is what differentiate them from each others.

Hope that helps.