Hi @silverpop_ea!
We ran an internal test using an audience of mobile IDs already hashed.
The following took place through the API:
EX ----
twurl -X POST -H ads-api.twitter.com "/1/accounts/18ce5475gij/tailored_audiences?name=api_prel_22385_test2&list_type=DEVICE_ID" | jq
{
"data_type": "tailored_audience",
"data": {
"targetable": false,
"name": "api_prel_22385_test2",
"targetable_types": [
"CRM",
"EXCLUDED_CRM"
],
"audience_type": "CRM",
"permission_level": "READ_WRITE",
"is_owner": true,
"id": "23f0s",
"reasons_not_targetable": [
"PROCESSING",
"TOO_SMALL"
],
"list_type": "DEVICE_ID",
"created_at": "2017-05-04T16:42:44Z",
"updated_at": "2017-05-05T20:03:49Z",
"partner_source": "OTHER",
"deleted": false,
"audience_size": null
},
"request": {
"params": {
"account_id": "18ce5475gij",
"name": "api_prel_22385_test2",
"list_type": "DEVICE_ID"
}
}
}
We then uploaded the same audience through the Ads Dashboard and selecting mobile advertising IDs with pre hashed selected. The results of the audience sizes were exactly the same.
Our recommendation to alleviate differences would be to make sure that the audience file is normalized first before each party uses the data. By normalized, I mean pre-hashed and then uploading through either endpoint.