Auctions without commitment in the auto-bidding world
Andrés Perlroth, Aranyak Mehta
Abstract
Advertisers in online ad auctions are increasingly using auto-bidding mechanisms to bid into auctions instead of directly bidding their value manually. One of the prominent auto-bidding formats is that of target cost-per-acquisition (tCPA) which maximizes the volume of conversions subject to a return-ofinvestment constraint. From an auction theoretic perspective however, this trend seems to go against foundational results that postulate that for profit-maximizing (aka quasi-linear) bidders, it is optimal to use a classic bidding system like marginal CPA (mCPA) bidding rather than using strategies like tCPA. In this paper we rationalize the adoption of such seemingly sub-optimal bidding within the canonical quasi-linear framework. The crux of the argument lies in the notion of commitment. We consider a multistage game where first the auctioneer declares the auction rules; then bidders select either the tCPA or mCPA bidding format (and submit bids accordingly); and then, if the auctioneer lacks commitment, it can revisit the rules of the auction (e.g., may readjust reserve prices depending on the bids submitted by the bidders). Our main result is that so long as a bidder believes that the auctioneer lacks commitment to follow the rule of the declared auction then the bidder will make a higher profit by choosing the tCPA format compared to the classic mCPA format. We then explore the commitment consequences for the auctioneer. In a simplified version of the model where there is only one bidder, we show that the tCPA subgame admits a credible equilibrium while the mCPA format does not. That is, when the bidder chooses the tCPA format the auctioneer can credibly implement the auction rules announced at the beginning of the game. We also show that, under some mild conditions, the auctioneer's revenue is larger when the bidder to uses the tCPA format rather than mCPA. We further quantify the value for the auctioneer to be able to commit to the declared auction rules.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 3884aa65-8ef4-4a50-9d69-b298a7129966Cited by top-tier papers3
- Efficiency of Non-Truthful Auctions in Auto-bidding with Budget ConstraintsChristopher Liaw, Aranyak Mehta, Wennan ZhuWWW 2024 · 10 citations
- Autobidding With Interdependent ValuesMartino Banchio, Kshipra Bhawalkar, Christopher Liaw, Aranyak Mehta et al.WWW 2025 · 2 citations
- Strategic Budget Selection in a Competitive Autobidding WorldYiding Feng, Brendan Lucier, Aleksandrs SlivkinsSTOC 2024 · 2 citations
Builds on4
- Towards Efficient Auctions in an Auto-bidding WorldYuan Deng, Jieming Mao, Vahab S. Mirrokni, Song ZuoWWW 2021 · 87 citations
- Auction Design for ROI-Constrained BuyersNegin Golrezaei, Ilan Lobel, Renato Paes LemeWWW 2021 · 55 citations
- Auction Design in an Auto-bidding Setting: Randomization Improves Efficiency Beyond VCGAranyak MehtaWWW 2022 · 41 citations
- Efficiency of the First-Price Auction in the Autobidding WorldYuan Deng, Jieming Mao, Vahab Mirrokni, Hanrui Zhang et al.NeurIPS 2024 · 1 citation
Related papers
- Platform Competition in the Autobidding WorldGagan Aggarwal, Andrés Perlroth, Ariel Schvartzman, Mingfei ZhaoWWW 2026 · 4 citations
- On the Coordination of Value-Maximizing BiddersYanru Guan, Jiahao Zhang, Zhe Feng, Tao LinICML 2026
- Risk-Averse and Optimistic Advertiser Incentive Compatibility in Auto-biddingChristopher Liaw, Wennan ZhuICML 2026 · 1 citation
- No-Regret Algorithms in non-Truthful Auctions with Budget and ROI ConstraintsGagan Aggarwal, Giannis Fikioris, Mingfei ZhaoWWW 2025 · 13 citations
- Model Monotonicity in Autobidding Auctions: When Do Better Predictions Lead to Better Outcomes?Ashwinkumar BadanidiyuruICML 2026
