Executive Summary
AdPlexity is a competitive intelligence ("ad spy") tool operated by AdIntelligence Limited (Hong Kong), serving affiliate marketers and media buyers since 2008. Runtime analysis reveals significant disclosure gaps: their own website deploys 8 third-party vendors (including Microsoft Clarity, Google Analytics, Meta Pixel, LinkedIn) pre-consent with zero named subprocessors in their privacy policy. Despite referencing GDPR compliance and EEA data safeguards, the site fires tracking pixels before any consent mechanism. The 2017-dated privacy policy discloses only Hong Kong as a data jurisdiction while actual data flows reach US-based vendors. This pattern of generic disclosure with specific non-compliance represents material misrepresentation risk.
Revenue Threat Profile
4 COLLAPSE VECTORSHow this vendor creates financial exposure. Each score (0-100) reflects observed runtime behavior and documented business practices.
CAC Subsidization
AdPlexity's own measurement stack (GA4, Clarity, Meta Pixel) creates attribution distortion. As an ad intelligence vendor, they monitor competitor campaigns while their tracking creates the same data pollution they help clients analyze. Their customers cannot trust measurement recommendations from a vendor with undisclosed tracking dependencies.
Signal Corruption
Pre-consent deployment of LinkedIn, Meta Pixel, and Google Ads means visitor intent signals leak to ad platforms before consent. Competitors using the same platforms gain visibility into AdPlexity customer research patterns. The ad spy tool itself becomes a demand signal source for the networks it monitors.
Legal Tail Risk
8 pre-consent third-party scripts expand attack surface significantly. Intercom chat widget, Mapbox maps, and ad tracking pixels each introduce supply chain risk. No security certifications (SOC2, ISO 27001) are claimed. Privacy policy from 2017 suggests security practices may be equally outdated.
GTM Attack Surface
GDPR mentioned but violated via pre-consent tracking. No CCPA disclosure despite US operations (Houston HQ). Zero named subprocessors despite using 8+ data processors. Hong Kong legal entity creates enforcement complexity. 2017 privacy policy predates GDPR enforcement (May 2018) and has not been updated. Material gap between compliance claims and runtime behavior.