ShopMy Guidance Raises Questions About Affiliate Commission Deduplication

Researcher Ben Edelman has published an analysis of archived ShopMy guidance that recommended prioritizing ShopMy when the same order appeared in ShopMy and another affiliate network. Edelman argues that this approach could cause a merchant to reverse a commission recorded elsewhere without first determining which affiliate provided the final eligible click. His research identifies 527 ShopMy brand partners that also operated affiliate programs through other networks, but it does not establish how every merchant resolved duplicate claims or whether all followed the guidance.

Key Takeaways: What the ShopMy Research Says

• An archived ShopMy support page recommended preserving the ShopMy commission when the same order appeared in another affiliate network.
• Edelman identified 527 ShopMy brand partners that also appeared to operate programs through at least one other network.
• His article reports 173 potentially affected Impact merchants, 163 Awin merchants, and 101 Rakuten Advertising merchants.
• Appearing on the list does not prove that a merchant paid two commissions, reversed another affiliate’s commission, or followed ShopMy’s guidance.
• ShopMy’s current documentation says merchants control order validation and may reverse commissions when duplicate or conflicting attribution occurs.
• Business of Fashion reported that ShopMy declined to comment on the specific allegations.

What the Archived ShopMy Guidance Said

Edelman’s research, published on August 20, centers on a ShopMy support page advising brands how to prevent creators from receiving duplicate commissions.
The page, which Edelman preserved through an archived copy and screenshot, recommended:

Deduplicating ShopMy orders against your affiliate network, and canceling duplicates within the affiliate network, not ShopMy.

ShopMy’s stated reasoning was that its platform provided a more direct relationship between brands and creators. According to the archived guidance, prioritizing ShopMy would help preserve creator relationships and campaign performance.
Edelman questions that reasoning. He argues that a direct relationship does not necessarily establish which affiliate supplied the final eligible click or should receive the commission under the merchant’s existing attribution rules.
The support page is no longer available on ShopMy’s current website. Business of Fashion reported that merchants were not required to follow the recommendation.

How Multiple Networks Can Record the Same Order

The issue described in the research can arise when a merchant operates a direct ShopMy brand partnership while also running an affiliate program through another network.

ShopMy’s current creator documentation distinguishes between two types of commercial relationships:

• Brand Partners connect directly to ShopMy and receive access to its platform, creator-performance data, commission codes, gifting, and paid opportunities.
• Commissionable Partners make their programs available to ShopMy through networks including Impact, Rakuten Advertising, CJ Affiliate, and ShareASale.

A brand can therefore work with ShopMy directly while also maintaining a separate program containing other publishers and creators.

ShopMy’s creator guide says affiliate earnings are typically determined through last-click attribution. However, last-click attribution becomes harder to apply when two separate systems each have access only to their own click data.

According to Edelman, each network may identify its own most recent affiliate click and report the same purchase as eligible for commission. The merchant must then decide whether to:

• Pay commissions through both systems.
• Compare click data across networks and pay the affiliate that supplied the final eligible click.
• Reverse one of the recorded commissions using another deduplication rule.

Edelman’s criticism concerns the third option. He argues that automatically prioritizing ShopMy would not necessarily identify which affiliate supplied the last click.

Edelman Identifies 527 Potentially Affected Merchants

Edelman cross-referenced ShopMy brand-partner information with affiliate-program data supplied by FMTC. His merchant list identifies 527 brands that appeared to work directly with ShopMy while also operating through another affiliate network.

The accompanying network breakdown includes:

• Impact: 173 merchants in Edelman’s main article; the associated network table currently displays 174
• Awin: 163 merchants
• Rakuten Advertising: 101 merchants
• Ascend, formerly Pepperjam: 38 merchants
• CJ Affiliate: 29 merchants
• AvantLink: 8 merchants
• Partnerize: 7 merchants

Edelman describes these businesses as “potentially affected.” The classification identifies merchants where competing attribution records could arise. It does not demonstrate that every merchant experienced duplicate reporting or followed the archived recommendation.

The merchant list also does not show which affiliate supplied the final click on an individual purchase, how many commissions were reversed, or the value of any affected transactions. Edelman says he is collecting further information about how individual merchants handled overlapping claims.

The Financial Estimate Is Not a Confirmed Loss Figure

Edelman cites reporting that ShopMy processes approximately $200 million in purchases each month, or more than $2 billion annually.

He estimates that a 15% commission rate would represent more than $300 million in annual creator commissions. From there, he calculates that if 10% of sales were double-paid or attributed to the wrong affiliate, the issue could reach eight figures.

That calculation is a hypothetical estimate. The research does not establish that 10% of ShopMy transactions were affected, nor does it provide a confirmed figure for duplicate payments, reversals, or commissions paid to the wrong affiliate.

ShopMy’s growth nevertheless gives the attribution question wider commercial relevance. The creator-commerce platform has expanded to more than 200,000 creators and reached a reported $1.5 billion valuation, placing it among the most prominent companies connecting creator recommendations with retail sales. ShopMy’s reported $1.5 billion valuation reflects its rapid growth and the wider expansion of creator commerce built around trusted recommendations.

Edelman Questions Whether Network Terms Allow the Reversals

Edelman also reviewed published terms from Impact, Awin, and Rakuten Advertising. He concludes that the documents do not allow a merchant to reverse an otherwise eligible commission solely because ShopMy also recorded the order.

Impact’s Master Campaign Agreement, for example, lists several circumstances in which an advertiser may cancel an action. These include incomplete, canceled, returned, fraudulent, out-of-area, and undeliverable transactions.

Edelman interprets the published terms as not providing a general basis for canceling another network’s commission simply to preserve ShopMy’s attribution.

That remains Edelman’s interpretation of the publicly available documents. Individual advertiser agreements, electronic insertion orders, offer terms, and attribution policies may contain additional rules governing transaction validation and deduplication.

ShopMy’s Current Guidance Gives Merchants Control Over Reversals

ShopMy’s current creator documentation says brands and retailers are responsible for reviewing and validating attributed orders.

Its guide to disappearing or reversed commissions lists several reasons why a commission may be removed, including:

• A returned, exchanged, or canceled order
• Failed payment
• A prohibited self-purchase
• A duplicate or potentially fraudulent transaction
• An attribution adjustment under the merchant’s program rules

The page states that ShopMy does not make or control commission reversals and instead reflects adjustments reported by brands and retailers.

ShopMy’s terms also recognize that purchases may be tracked through another platform, creating a conflict or duplicate commission claim. The current pages reviewed for this article do not set out a cross-network prioritization rule that directly answers Edelman’s criticism of the archived guidance.

What Has and Has Not Been Established

The available material documents that ShopMy published the recommendation and that numerous direct brand partners also operated through other affiliate networks.

It does not establish:

• That all 527 listed merchants followed the recommendation.
• How many individual orders appeared in multiple systems.
• Whether a ShopMy creator or another affiliate supplied the final eligible click in those transactions.
• How much commission was duplicated, reversed, or reassigned.
• Whether ShopMy continues to recommend the same approach privately.
• Whether the named affiliate networks have reviewed affected merchant accounts.

Business of Fashion reported that larger retailers may already use software capable of comparing commissions and clicks across multiple systems. That could allow them to identify the final eligible referral without automatically prioritizing either network.

The Issue Differs From Browser-Extension Attribution Cases

The mechanism described by Edelman differs from the attribution behavior alleged in recent browser-extension controversies.

Reporting on Phia’s affiliate attribution practices concerned technology that could reportedly set or refresh affiliate tracking without a deliberate purchasing interaction. The allegations involving PayPal Honey and the Capital One Shopping creator lawsuit focused on extensions allegedly replacing or overriding an earlier affiliate’s attribution around checkout.

Edelman is not alleging that ShopMy used a browser extension to overwrite another affiliate’s cookie. His research concerns how merchants were advised to resolve duplicate commission claims after separate systems recorded the same order.

Keeping those mechanisms separate is important. Affiliate attribution disputes can involve tracking behavior, contractual rules, merchant validation decisions, or a combination of the three.

What Affiliate Managers Should Review

Program managers operating across creator platforms and traditional affiliate networks should review how duplicate transactions are identified and resolved.

The practical checks include:

1. Mapping every affiliate network, creator platform, and direct tracking integration connected to the merchant’s checkout.
2. Establishing which attribution rule applies when multiple systems report the same transaction.
3. Comparing click timestamps across platforms where the required data is available.
4. Recording the specific reason for every commission reversal.
5. Checking whether advertiser agreements and individual program terms permit the chosen deduplication method.
6. Giving publishers a route to query reversals and supply supporting click or conversion data.
7. Confirming that internal teams understand the difference between a duplicate order and an invalid referral.

The need for consistent attribution rules extends beyond this individual dispute. The APMA attributionaudit found operational differences in how affiliate technologies identified and treated earlier publisher referrals. Cross-network tracking adds another layer because no single platform necessarily sees the complete click sequence.

Public Responses Remain Limited

At the time of writing, ShopMy had not published a substantive response to Edelman’s research. Its current duplicate-commission guidance tells brands to apply their contractual attribution rules consistently and, where last-click attribution applies, credit whichever platform’s link was clicked last.

That differs from the archived recommendation cited by Edelman, which advised merchants to preserve the ShopMy commission when deduplicating against another affiliate network. However, the current page does not show when its wording changed, and ShopMy has not publicly explained the revision or directly addressed the research.

No direct response had been identified from the affiliate networks named in Edelman’s analysis. Affiverse will update this article if ShopMy, those networks, or affected merchants provide further information.

Transparent Deduplication Is the Wider Issue

Edelman’s research does not establish that every merchant identified in his analysis attributed commissions incorrectly. It documents archived guidance and a group of merchants using overlapping affiliate systems that could generate competing claims for the same order.

The central issue is whether cross-network attribution rules are agreed in advance, supported by complete data, and applied consistently. Publishers and creators also need enough information to distinguish a return or invalid transaction from a later eligible click or a decision to prioritize another platform.

Transparent rules cannot determine which touchpoint influenced a purchase most. They can show how credit was assigned, why a commission changed, and whether the result matched the terms accepted by each party.