The top one says 436 opens of 535 sent (that would be AWESOME) but I don’t think it can be right. That’s an 81.5% open rate.
Now down below, there is a % which says 45.08% - I take that to mean the “open rate.”
So what’s the difference?
Is the open rate calculated using “unique” opens, but the “Opens” in the card measuring non-unique opens (so total opens including one person opening the same email multiple times?)
Ideally, I’d love to have a breadown in this thread that explains the calculations for each of these reported items. @FernandoOrtiz can we get Pinneo or someone to provide that for us here?
Hey @Morgan! I’m really happy to know you’re enjoying the feature
Let me try to break down what’s happening - this comes down to unique opens (open rate) vs total opens, and the impact of machine-opens.
What you see on the first screenshot (436 opens) includes:
People opening the email
Bots and privacy services (Apple, spam filters) that pre-fetch the images
On the second screenshot, 45.08% open rate is calculated from unique opens - unique opens / total emails sent. This metric attempts to represent real users who opened the email at least once.
Email clients (especially Apple Mail Privacy) often pre-load images and trigger the tracking pixel automatically. Those are counted as opens even if nobody actually read the email, which is why total opens can look very high.
This has caused platforms to treat open rate as “directional” (it gives a sense of whether things are trending up or down, but it’s not precise enough to rely on as a hard metric), while clicks and click rate are more reliable indicators of engagement.
Thanks for the explanation - (not what I expected the answer to be)
Based on this, I think we should change the card metric: Here’s my logic
I don’t think machine opens are a valuable metric to any marketer - while I get what you’re saying about directionality, if we have “unique opens” why would we not use that?
Then we’re using “unique opens” (the count) in the cards, and then also using the same metric for “open rate” (a percentage) - personally, I would find this more valuable.
I don’t really need “machine open rates” (and while I get that there still may be some overlap, using unique would get us much closer to the unique number.
