AASD Analysis

Part
01
of three
Part
01

AASD Market Size

The approximate calculated market size of the monetization of anonymous and aggregated subscriber data for mobile devices is about $67.7 billion as of 2018. This amount is expected to reach about $103.4 billion by 2021, growing at a CAGR of 15.15%. The United States holds about 7% of the total market, with an approximate market size of $5.01 billion in 2018. Europe's market share is about 4% of the total market, with an approximate market size of $2.85 billion. India's market share is less clear, but is at least 6.8%, with a market size of at least $4.66 billion. A look at the methodology we used to determine this market size is below, along with our triangulated findings.

Methodology

When searching for the market size of the monetization of anonymous and aggregated subscriber data (AASD) for mobile devices, we began by looking for a directly-available amount from research companies such as MarketWatch, Statista, The Market Research News, and others. Unfortunately, all that was available were reports that provided the big data market size, the global mobile data traffic market size, and mobile data usage numbers. None of this information provided us with the value of AASD or how much money companies are currently spending to purchase it. We also were unable to find the amount of anonymous personal data sent overall or by mobile devices, which we thought we might be able to use to triangulate the percentage of mobile AASD of the total market.

We turned our attention to industry publications with the hope of finding the global market size of AASD as estimated by experts in the field. This strategy yielded an industry article that discussed the total approximate market value of AASD, which was quoted as $210 billion by Vetri. The experts at Vetri state that the data that makes up this market is currently not the "data of individual people, but rather... huge sets of [data from] thousands of more or less anonymous users," which tells us that this is the right market we were searching for. This article also states that "exactly how much money is involved in the personal-data trade can be determined only approximately," so we can only say that $210 billion is an estimated market size for the total monetization of AASD across all platforms and devices.

Our next task was to find out how much of the total market belongs to mobile devices. This proved to be much more difficult, as the amount of personal data collected by mobile devices is not readily available. We attempted to locate how much personal data each mobile user generates on their devices each year, but we could only find the amount of data traffic each user is responsible for, which we determined is not the same metric as AASD. We did try to triangulate the market share of mobile AASD by using the amount of personal data stored globally across all platforms, which was found in a Strategy-Business article, but because we were not able to find the amount of personal data stored by mobile devices, this triangulation attempt failed.

During our initial research into the market share of mobile AASD, we came across several articles that discussed the market size of geo-targeted advertising sales using anonymous location data, which is only used for mobile devices. We found that this segment of AASD is worth about $21 billion as of 2018. Even though most industry articles that discuss AASD refer to geolocation and "Bluetooth-based beacon technology," we understood there were other mobile segments monetizing AASD. Therefore, we continued our search for a breakdown of the other segments so we could get a total market value.

Unfortunately, a search for the market size of other mobile segments monetizing AASD failed, as industry publications focused mainly on location-based AASD and market research reports only provided the full market size of related industries such as big data and analytics. We even thought we might be able to provide an estimate by using the market share of mobile for one of these related industries as a proxy, but again, we were thwarted by paywalls and unrelated data points, such as the percent of mobile phones versus desktop computers and the number of Google searches on mobile versus desktop.

Finally, we began searching for the amount of personal data generated by mobile phone users and came across a study conducted by Vanderbilt University and reported by AdWeek that broke down the percentages of AASD sent to Google by an idle Android device according to segments. This article provided the percentage of data that represents various AASD activities. The study found that 31% of data collected was through location, 32% was through data upload, 23% was through app store data, and 14% was through other means. We assumed that the percentages of data transmitted by an idle phone would be more or less equivalent to the overall percentages of AASD sent by mobile devices. We were then able to use the market size for location-based AASD to determine the full amount of the mobile AASD market size:

$21,000,000,000 / 0.31 = $67,741,935,484 or approximately $67.7 billion.

We can break down the segments of mobile AASD as follows:

Location-based AASD: $21 billion
Upload AASD: $21.7 billion ($67,741,935,484 x 0.32)
App Store AASD: $15.6 billion ($67,741,935,484 x 0.23)
Other AASD: $9.5 billion ($67,741,935,484 x 0.14)

We then moved to find a breakdown of value for the United States, Western Europe, and India. While we were able to find the total value of AASD per U.S. and European user across all platforms and devices, the same data was not provided for India. The Strategy-Business article provided the approximate value of data per Internet user in the United States and Europe. To determine the value of data per mobile user, we first calculated the market share of mobile AASD by dividing $67,741,935,484 by $210,000,000,000, which equals 32%. Then, we took the average value of data per Internet user globally, in the United States, and in Europe and multiplied each by 32% to get the average value of data per mobile user per month in these regions:

Global: $1.18 x 0.32 = $0.38
U.S.: $4.91 x 0.32 = $1.57
Europe: $1.59 x 0.32 = $0.51

We also found the number of smartphone users in each country (most AASD comes from smartphones) and calculated the approximate market size for the United States and Europe:

United States: 265.9 million smartphone users x $1.57 = $417,463,000 or about $417.5 million per month or $5.01 billion per year ($417.5 million x 12).
Europe: 465 million mobile subscribers x $0.51 = $237,150,000 or about $237.2 million per month or $2.85 billion per year ($237.2 million x 12).
If we assume that India's value of data per mobile user per month is the same as the global value, then:
India: 1.021 billion smartphone users x $0.38 = $387,980,000 or about $388.0 million per month or $4.66 billion per year ($388.0 million x 12).

Once we had found some indication of the market shares for the U.S., Europe, and India, we turned our attention to market growth. The only publications that provided some indication of growth are the Strategy-business article, which said the entire global AASD data market would grow to about $400 billion in 2025 and a Fast Company article that indicated geo-targeted ad sales would grow to $32.4 billion by 2021. Using a CAGR calculator, the beginning value of $210.0 billion in 2018 and the ending value of $400 billion in 2025, we determined that the average growth rate for the entire AASD market is expected to be 9.64%.

We also used the expected geo-targeted ad sales 2021 projected market size to establish a growth rate for mobile AASD. Again using a CAGR calculator, the beginning value of $21.0 billion in 2018, and the ending value of $32.4 billion in 2021, we determined that the average growth rate for the geo-targeted AASD between 2018 and 2021 is expected to be 15.55%. This would mean that if the entire global mobile AASD market size grows at the same pace as the mobile location AASD segment, the total market size would be about $103.4 billion in 2021 ($67,741,935,484 x 15.15 CAGR over three years).

If we assume that the 15.55% CAGR applies to all mobile AASD segments, we can project the following data points for 2021:

Location-based AASD: $32.4 billion
Upload AASD: $33.1 billion ($21.7 x 15.15% CAGR over three years)
App Store AASD: $23.8 billion ($15.6 billion x 15.15% CAGR over three years)
Other AASD: $14.5 billion ($9.5 billion x 15.15% CAGR over three years)

If we assume that the 15.55 CAGR applies to all regions for mobile AASD, we can project the following data points for 2021:

United States: $7.65 billion ($5.01 billion x 15.15% CAGR over three years)
Europe: $4.35 billion ($2.85 billion x 15.15% CAGR over three years)
India: $7.12 billion ($4.66 billion x 15.15% CAGR over three years)

Market size of Mobile Anonymous and Aggregated Subscriber Data

According to Vetri, the global market size of the monetization of anonymous and aggregated subscriber data (AASD) is $210 billion. This includes AASD from all sources, including mobile, desktop, wearable devices, smart car devices, smart home devices, and more. The global market size for all AASD data is expected to grow as a CAGR of 9.64% to reach $400 billion by 2025.

Based on a report from BIA Advisory Services, which itself is behind a paywall, but whose content was revealed by the New York Times, the mobile location AASD market size was worth $21 billion in 2018. In addition, a study by Vanderbilt University and reported in AdWeek found that mobile location AASD accounts for 31% of the data generated by mobile users. Using this information, we determined the total mobile AASD market is worth about $67.7 billion. The various mobile AASD segment market sizes are the following:

Location-based AASD: $21 billion (31%)
Upload AASD: $21.7 billion (32%)
App Store AASD: $15.6 billion (23%)
Other AASD: $9.5 billion (14%)

These values are expected to grow at a CAGR of 15.15% through 2021, which, assuming the segments continue to represent the same percentage of mobile AASD, would mean that the total global market size for mobile AASD would be worth about $103.4 billion and the individual AASD segments would be worth the following amounts in 2021:

Location-based AASD: $32.4 billion (31%)
Upload AASD: $33.1 billion (32%)
App Store AASD: $23.8 billion (23%)
Other AASD: $14.5 billion (14%)

We also found that in 2018, the United States market share for mobile AASD was worth about $5.01 billion, the European market share was worth about $2.85 billion, and the Indian market share was worth at least $4.66 billion. This information is based on the average value of data per mobile user per month as reported by Strategy-Business. If we assume these values grow at the same pace as the global mobile AASD market, these regions would attain the following market sizes in 2021:

United States: $7.65 billion
Europe: $4.35 billion
India: at least $7.12 billion
Part
02
of three
Part
02

AASD Market Analysis

Some Fortune 500 companies that are selling aggregated and/or anonymized subscriber data (AASD) from various sources including mobile are Mastercard, Visa, American Express, and IBM (through The Weather Channel). Other Fortune 500 companies that may be selling AASD include Verizon, AT&T, and Facebook. Companies that are selling AASD that are not Fortune 500 companies are Envestnet, Twitter, and Unroll.me. Sprint and T-Mobile are not Fortune 500 companies, but they may still be selling location-based data despite promises to end the practice.

There are numerous data brokers that are selling AASD including Acxiom, Oracle (number 81 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list), Zumigo, and MicroBilt. Banks are also beginning to capitalize on the monetization of AASD, with Australian banks such as Westpac and The Commonwealth bank using a third-party platform to sell customers' AASD.

Two of the most valuable mobile AASD data sets include location-based and browser data, but other than knowing the location-based data market is worth $21 billion, it is unknown if there are other mobile AASD data sets that are more valuable. It is known that healthcare AASD is among the most valuable data, but except for data from health tracking apps, this is typically not obtained through mobile channels. A deeper look at our findings and our methodology is below.

Methodology

To identify companies that are selling AASD, we began by looking for mentions of this activity in trusted media sources such as Forbes, American Banker, Business Insider, Vice, New York Magazine, and others. This provided us with the majority of general insights we were able to find. Unfortunately, this strategy did not provide much information about companies that sell mobile data; however, as mobile devices are becoming more prolific every year, we assumed that these companies likely sell mobile data in addition to traditional data. Moreover, our research indicated that location-based data is extremely valuable, which would mean that mobile data from these companies is likely highly in demand.

We did attempt to find more specific information about companies selling mobile AASD as opposed to traditional AASD by looking into companies served by various data brokers, but while we were able to identify numerous large mobile-dominant clients of data brokers (i.e. Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc.), we were unable to verify whether the data brokers sold or bought data from these clients. Mostly, they were just listed as "partners," without any information about their transactions.

Finally, we looked into reports of data breaches from Forbes, Norton, PrivacyRights, LifeLock, and others to see if we could identify companies that may be selling their data as opposed to simply storing it for their own use, but these reports only provided information on unintentional data leaks that provided access to non-anonymous data. We were able to use some of this information to provide insights into what data is considered valuable, but not for the names of companies selling data.

With the limited information available on the Fortune 500 companies that are selling AASD, we expanded our search to include companies that are not on the Fortune 500 list, but that are well-known or larger companies. This yielded information on Twitter, Envestnet, and a lesser-known company (Unroll.me) that sells to well-known companies like Uber. Details on the transactions were likewise limited, but we were able to give insights that we believe will be helpful.

During our research, we came across several articles that discussed companies that may be selling AASD, so we decided to include information about them as well, since we cannot completely rule out their involvement in selling AASD. For example, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint have all pledged to stop selling location-based data to third-party brokers; however, as recently as January 2019, all but Verizon were still engaging in that practice. Facebook denies selling AASD, but there is significant debate about that, so we included information about this Fortune 500 company as well.

We were unable to identify the most valuable mobile AASD data sets available for sale. We did find some information that provides insights into some data sets that are in demand, including location-based data sets and browsing history data; however, with only the market size of the location-based data available, we were unable to compare data sets to determine which was more valuable. To find this information, we conducted searches through market research reports on IBISWorld, MarketWatch, and Statista, but it appears these niches have not yet been studies, as all reports were on the market size of big data and did not provide a breakdown of segments.

We continued searching for this information through media articles such as those already mentioned, which is where we found the insights on location-based data and browser history data. This is also how we found some values we could attach to browser data. Unfortunately, there was no indication of which type is more valuable, although there are indications that location-based data that provides "real-time" insights is in high demand. There as also an article from a business consultant that provided some parameters that tend to make some AASD data sets more valuable than others, so we included that information in our analysis as well.

Fortune 500 companies that sell AASd

In 2018, Mastercard (number 210 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list), American Express (number 72 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list), and Envestnet (not on the Fortune 500 list) sold "aggregated, anonymous data to identify trends in certain consumer segments across shopping categories." Some of the biggest buyers of this data are hedge funds and money managers as AlternativeData.org found that "more than 160 money managers — including firms such as Fidelity, T. Rowe Price and Schroders — now employ at least 340 full time data analysts, scientists and engineers dedicated to analyzing such information." In 2017, American Banker also noted that Visa (number 153 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list) also sells "card transaction data to third parties."

Mastercard, in particular, has been selling AASD since at least 2013, when it approached "media-agency trading desks with an enticing offer: data representing 80 billion consumer purchases." Since then, the credit card giant has expanded its data-selling capabilities to retailers, banks, and governments. In 2014, the company indicated in its annual report that it earned $341 million from selling data, which was an increase of 22% over 2013. By the first quarter of 2018, Mastercard's revenue from selling AASD had jumped to $748 million, a 119% increase over the first quarter of 2014. In 2018, a quiet partnership developed between Mastercard and Google in which "Google reportedly paid Mastercard millions of dollars for data on what people have been buying." This data was "anonymized in order to protect personally identifiable information" and was from offline sources rather than mobile, but it is clear that Mastercard is selling all types of AASD to various buyers.

While there is no information on how much revenue American Express has earned through selling AASD, it has a division that is devoted to such business activities. Its "Business Insights consulting division" has, for years, been using its AASD transaction data to provide special offers on behalf of advertisers to its cardholders through direct mail and online channels. While American Express does not divulge its partners, it has provided cardholders with assurances that "the AmEx data models don't allow for direct targeting of its card holders."

The Weather Company, which is owned by IBM (number 38 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list), sells its location-based data to advertisers who can "use Weather data outside [its] owned and operated properties to make their own inventory purchases across the web." Its data is "first party location data," so it is not sold through a broker and The Weather Company has specific language in its privacy policy that outlines how it collects the data and provides consumers with the ability to opt out.

Companies that may or may not sell AASD

Verizon Wireless (number 19 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list), AT&T (number 9 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list), Sprint, and T-Mobile (who are not on this year's Fortune 500 list, but have made it in the past) have all sold location-based mobile data to third-party data brokers in the past; however, in June 2018, they all "pledged to stop sharing subscribers’ location data with anonymous data brokers." Specifically, Verizon indicated it would no longer sell its AASD to LocationSmart and Zumingo. When their decision was made public, the other three major U.S. carriers followed suit.

However, in January 2019, an investigation conducted by Joseph Cox of Motherboard found that T-Mobile, Sprint, and AT&T were still selling access to their customers' data as he was able to pay $300 to a third party "bounty hunter" who was able to analyze mobile AASD to find the current location of a mobile phone. The bounty hunter used a tracking tool that "relies on real-time location data sold to bounty hunters that ultimately originated from the telcos themselves, including T-Mobile, AT&T, and Sprint." AT&T indicated the third-party data aggregator violated the company's policies, which state that "they require their clients to get consent from the people they want to track," but this is not always happening.

Following the investigation, Sprint, T-Mobile, and AT&T all immediately cut ties to the third-party aggregator (Zumigo) that sold the location-based data to MicroBilt. T-Mobile indicated that as of January 2019, it would be "ending location aggregator work," while AT&T stated it had "stopped partnering with 'most' location aggregation services last year" and would be terminating the remainder of its contracts by March 2019. Sprint indicated it took "immediate action to ensure MicroBilt no longer had access to Sprint location data, and have notified Zumigo that [they were] immediately terminating [their] contract." Verizon had already ended its relationship with Zumigo and indicated that it had also "ended similar arrangements, with the exception of some roadside assistance companies, which it is also in the process of ending."

Facebook (number 57 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list) adamantly denies that it sells AASD and states instead that "users' data is kept within Facebook and the company has an ad-targeting system, which [it] claims is distinct from selling data." The social media giant sells advertising that is based on user data, but they do not have access to the data itself. Some data scientists, though, do not believe there is a difference between selling data and ad targeting. For instance, Michael Kosinski, assistant professor at Stanford University's Graduate School of Business, said, "I am shocked that anyone continues to believe this claim... Every time you click on a Facebook ad, Facebook sells data on you to that advertiser. This is such a basic property of online targeted advertising that it would be impossible to avoid, even if Facebook somehow wanted to."

Marketers who want to advertise on Facebook can choose their audience from several categories including location, demographics, interest and hobbies, connections, income level, and behavior. The website states that "we can help you connect to people who are likely to be interested in what you offer. Core Audiences can be as broad or well-defined as you like." According to experts this is no different from selling the data directly because "if a platform can be used to target specific users, then it reveals those users' data." In a direct refutation of Kosinski's claim, Facebook's Vice President of Ads stated, "You are entitled to your opinion, but we don't sell people's data. Period." However, Kosinski responded that "Facebook's claiming that it is not selling user data is like a bar's giving away a free martini with every $12 bag of peanuts and then claiming that it's not selling drinks... Rich user data is Facebook's most prized possession, and the company sure isn't throwing it in for free."

Non-Fortune 500 companies selling data

Envestnet, while not a Fortune 500 company, earns significant revenue by selling anonymous data from its financial planning site, Yodlee "to third parties such as hedge funds, [which] use it to predict company performance and make trading decisions." Not all Envestnet's revenue comes from the sale of AASD, but its "free cash flow rose at a 30.6% annual rate" during the five years ending in 2017, which indicates an increase in the value or amount of AASD data it is selling. For example, Point72 Asset Management and Tiger Global Management each paid approximately $2 million for "an annual subscription to Yodlee's service."

In 2017, Twitter, which is not a Fortune 500 company, but does land at number 756 on the 2019 Fortune 1000 list, sold its AASD to a third-party researcher (Aleksandr Kogan) who then sold it to Cambridge Analytica. In addition, Kogan's company Global Science Research (GSR), also "purchased one-time API access to a random sample of public tweets between December 2014 and April 2015." Twitter stated the data it sold to GSR was "already public" and contends that during an internal review, the company "did not find any access to private data about people who use Twitter."

The article reporting this transaction also noted that "it's a fairly common practice for Twitter to sell API access to large organizations for surveying opinions around different news events, topics, and ideas." Known as "data licensing," Twitter earned $87 million from the sale of its data in the third quarter of 2017, which represented 15% of its total revenue. Marketers can purchase "30 days' worth of tweets for as little as $149 per month." The entire historical archive of tweets is available for "thousands of dollars per year."

Another company that sells AASD include Unroll.me, a company owned by Slice that helps people unsubscribe from emails and clean up their email lists. In 2017, Unroll.me "analyzed data from users' email inboxes, then sold that data to Uber." Uber then used the data for competitive reasons to show the health (or lack thereof) of Lyft's business. While Unroll.me would not divulge its buyers other than Uber, it did say, "it routinely sells data in this way to third parties, which is how the site makes money."

Data brokers

Acxiom is a data broker that operates in Europe and the United States. It is a publicly-traded company and generates an annual revenue of $1.1 billion, which comes from selling AASD and providing analytical services that help companies use the data. Its U.S. market share for data selling is much larger than its European counterpart, suggesting that U.S. data is more valuable than that from other countries. This company "pioneered the business model of collecting data on people, segmenting them and selling it to other businesses to use in their marketing." Major companies it works with include eBay, IBM, Nielsen, Pandora, Pinterest, PayPal, Snapchat, Spotify, Twitter, and Facebook. However, it is uncertain if they sell data to or buy data from these companies.

Oracle (number 81 on the 2019 Fortune 500 list) is a major data broker that operates a "database of 5 billion consumer profiles, fed by 15 million data sources" to "to help advertisers and publishers better target ads." The company's Data Cloud is primarily stocked with information from publishers, retail loyalty programs, and "traditional data brokers like Experian and IHS." It is unknown how much of the data offered comes from mobile sources, but with that many profiles, it is likely a major portion of the data it offers is from mobile activity. Part of what they offer partners are insights that are "tied to anonymous profiles before distribution."

Zumigo is a major data broker, specifically focused on selling location-based data, that was scrutinized for its partnerships with Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile. On its website, it indicates it has partners with "mobile providers, credit bureaus, financial institutions, and retail merchants," which means it obtains data from various entities and resells it for a multitude of purposes. In 2017, Zumigo requested that the U.S. Federal Trade Commission "to place even fewer restrictions on how some of the data it sells can be used, and specifically asked for the agency to loosen user consent requirements for data sharing." Not only does Zumigo use the data for fraud prevention, but it also sells it for marketing and "skip-trace" purposes.

MicroBilt is a credit-reporting company that purchases geo-location data from Zumigo and then re-sells it "with little oversight to a spread of different private industries, ranging from car salesmen and property managers to bail bondsmen and bounty hunters." Its phone location service, which uses the data from Zumigo, worked on all mobile networks, but it is unknown whether it still offers this service or not, as wireless carriers have since severed their contracts with Zumigo, effectively cutting off the pipeline to the location-based data that MicroBilt used.

A long list of data brokers can be found in Fast Company's article on data brokers that are "quietly buying and selling" consumer information and includes background check companies, credit reporting companies, marketing analytics companies, insurance companies, search engines, and people search services. It is unknown which of these companies buy and sell mobile AASD data, but some obviously do (like Reveal Mobile, Inc.), but it is likely that with the proliferation of mobile phone use that most of these companies deal in mobile data as well as data from traditional sources.

Big banks like Westpac and the Commonwealth Bank, both operating in Australia, are selling "anonymous, aggregated information about customers’ spending habits to other businesses" and business banking clients. These banks are using the Data Republic platform, which provides a secure channel for the exchange of data that minimizes data leaks and breaches. While Data Republic was primarily founded to facilitate secure data sharing, it "also allows participating businesses to do something else: sell data to each other."

Most valued mobile data sets

While hedge fund and money management companies are looking for card holder data, which may or may not be from mobile sources, the most valuable mobile AASD data sets are those related to location. Location-based AASD is a $21 billion market and is only expected to grow. Based on a New York Times investigation, the precise location of a mobile phone, and thus, a mobile phone owner can be "tracked up to 14,000 times per day." This same investigation showed that "more than 75 companies now directly pay for raw location data from smartphone apps, eager to gain insights into people’s everyday whereabouts." Even more companies are willing to pay for location-based advertising, which uses AASD, but is not sold directly to these companies.

Of the 13 types of data Forbes describes in its informational article about data sets, real-time data is considered "one of the most explosive trends in analytics." While the article does not explicitly state how valuable this data set is, it does mention that "real-time data can help with everything from deploying emergency resources in a road crash to helping traffic flow more smoothly during a citywide event... and can can also provide a better link between consumers and brands allowing the most relevant offers to be delivered at precise moments based upon location and preferences." This makes it clear that location-based data that provides real-time insights is in high demand due to its various applications.

Bail bondsman and bounty hunters find location-based data extremely valuable and do not always have to pay a lot to get it. According to an investigation conducted by Motherboard, using location-based data to locate a phone can cost as little as $4.95 per phone, while real-time updates from a phone costs about $12.95 per phone. Companies can also get bulk discounts if they want the capability to track more phones. For instance, companies that want to track 20,000 or more phones will pay $3.22 per phone or $8.42 per phone for real-time updates. This information comes directly from telco companies through a third-party data aggregator, in this case, MicroBilt.

Browsing data is also desirable, whether from a desktop or a mobile phone. However, it appears to be less valuable than location-based data. For instance, in 2017, after receiving quotes from 100 data brokers, a German researcher found she could purchase a month's worth of browsing data for between €10,000 (~$11,169) and €500,000 (~$558,460). The data she ended up using (she didn't purchase it because she used a free trial) came from the "Web of Trust" plugin that assured that its "data sales were compliant with its terms of service and that company went to 'great lengths' to anonymize the data."

Although not usually obtained from mobile sources, AASD "healthcare data sets are among the largest and most valuable." Due to HIPAA laws, identifiable data cannot be sold, but the regulations allow "patient medical information [to] be sold anonymously, eliminating identifying characteristics like people's names and birth dates." Healthcare insurers, pharmacies, laboratories, electronic records systems, and health tracker companies like FitBit can and do sell AASD to a variety of companies in numerous industries.

Some characteristics that make certain data sets more valuable than others include the "level of detail and specificity" of the data, how far back the data goes (history), and breadth of coverage (i.e. geographical coverage, number of data points, etc.). The more "unique and original" a data set is, the more valuable it will be. In addition, the value of data sets tends to decrease over time, especially as other companies will eventually gain access to similar data sets. Hedge funds, for example, will typically pay anywhere from the low tens of thousands to "a couple million a year" for specific data sets." However, average annual fees "range from somewhere in the high tens of thousands of dollars to somewhere in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars."
Part
03
of three
Part
03

AASD Value HIghlights

The amount companies are willing to pay for AASD is dependent on the nature of the data. Companies are willing to pay as much as $2 million annually for AASD about consumer finances and purchases, while others are willing to pay $10,000 daily for population location and movement data. Below, you will find more details.

METHODOLOGY

To determine the value points in the AASD (Anonymous and Aggregated Subscriber Data) market, our research team first studied the various AASD users and the companies in the space and then attempted to find the amount companies are either paying for access to the data or how much companies in the space charge. Our research team decided to triangulate the data via this strategy after we determined that the data wasn't available pre-compiled.

Most companies in the sector do not provide details on pricing publicly so we had to rely on third-party sources in some cases as well as on data older than the Wonder standard of 24 months because they were the latest/only data available. However, the pricing provided is likely to reflect the true nature of the market as recent pricing information we uncovered suggests that the older information is still relevant. We have provided as much pricing information specific to AASD as we were able to uncover in order to provide a robust view of the value points in the AASD market

HOW MUCH COMPANIES ARE WILLING TO PAY

The amount companies are willing to pay for the data depends on the type of Anonymous and Aggregated Subscriber Data (AASD) in question and the vendor selling the data. Companies such as Tiger Global Management and Point72 Asset Management pay $2 million annually for AASD about consumer purchases and financial data. Pfizer spends $12 million annually purchasing health data, including healthcare AASD from IMS Health. Companies pay about $10,000 for AASD that provides location intelligence and population movement analytics aggregated by Airsage from cellphone carriers. However, SAP offers similar data for just $439 per insight (or zip code) or $1,429 for five insights/zip codes.

Payment Model

The main payment model is the subscription model because the data is updated frequently. Companies can choose to pay annually while companies such as Airsage allow clients to purchase data daily. Big companies normally pay for the data annually. However, SAP also offers the data as a one-time purchase of a specific data file.

Most Popular Data

Our research team determined that the most popular AASD in the market are those related to consumer purchases and personal finance anonymized and aggregated by debit and credit card providers that companies will pay as much as $2 million for annually; location and population movement data anonymized and aggregated by telecommunication companies that will be worth an estimated $79 billion globally in 2020; and AASD in the healthcare sector that is also a multi-billion dollar industry.
Sources
Sources

From Part 02