VS TRANSUNIONTruAudience · and the graph that outlasts a consortium

Identity you
own.
Not a graph you license.

TruAudience licenses access · we build it in your house
The argument, in one paragraph

TransUnion built TruAudience after acquiring TruOptik — credit-bureau identity meeting ad-tech activation, packaged into a consortium graph buyers can license. The graph is good. The graph is also theirs. We do the inverse — we build the graph in your house, on your data, anchored to ground truth, and you keep the keys. TransUnion is the right answer when your activation specifically requires their consortium IDs. We are the right answer when you want the graph to outlast any one consortium.

What they say.
What we answer.

001 / on graph
Consortium identity graph.
Yours. Not consortium.
002 / on data
Credit-bureau records as the spine.
Government registries as the spine. Anchored.
003 / on cost
Per-record licensing.
Flat. Per resolution, not per record.
004 / on resilience
Future-proof to TruAudience's future.
Future-proof to yours.
The outcome our buyers come for

If their consortium
pivots, you don't follow.

Consortium identity is a deal — three or four big partners agree on an ID, hold it together, and the buyer pays to be inside. Deals shift. We are not in a consortium. The graph stays whole when any one ID source pivots, deprecates, or rewrites its terms.

Honest disadvantage — when TransUnion is the right answer
TransUnion is the right tool when your activation partners explicitly contract on TruAudience consortium IDs and your buyer-side procurement is already aligned with TransUnion. We consume their IDs as inputs; we do not replace your activation contracts. If the SOW says TruAudience, follow the SOW.
Request access→ Customer login → app.thespine.tech
TheSPINE