Guide
Tracking & ROI
Brands
Attribution stacking happens when two different tracking signals — one creator's tracking link and a different creator's discount code, for example — both genuinely touch the same order, but only one can actually receive the commission. There's no universal rule for which one wins: Awin's own documentation lets a valid click always beat a discount code, while impact.com's own documentation lets the partner's agreed tier decide, and only lets the code win when both partners sit at the same tier.
Attribution stacking happens when two different tracking signals — typically one creator's tracking link and a different creator's discount code — both genuinely touch the same order, even though only one of them can end up with the commission credit. It isn't the same thing as multi-touch attribution, which deliberately splits credit across a chosen model; stacking is a purely technical conflict between two competing, both-valid signals. Which one wins depends entirely on which affiliate platform or network you run — and they don't agree with each other.
A tracking link and a discount code are two separate technical mechanisms. The link sets a cookie the moment a customer clicks — long before any order exists. The code only becomes relevant when the customer types it in at checkout. Nothing stops both from being "active" on the same order: a customer can click Creator A's link today, forget about it, then five days later buy after finding Creator B's discount code on a coupon-aggregator site — the code gets typed in, the link's cookie is still sitting in the browser, and the order completes with both signals present at once.
According to Shopify's own documentation on combining discounts, a customer can have up to five product or order discount codes plus one shipping discount code combined on the same order — but only if the discounts themselves are set to combine; otherwise Shopify automatically applies "the best" one and rejects the rest with the message "Some discount codes couldn't be used together. We applied the best combination." That rule governs discount codes against each other, and nothing else. A tracking link's cookie isn't a "discount" in Shopify's own system at all — it's a tracking signal laid on top by an entirely separate app or network (Awin, impact.com, Shopify Collabs, and so on). Shopify's own combination rules have nothing to say about who wins when a link and a code from two different creators land on the same order. That's decided by whichever affiliate platform you've chosen — and platforms disagree sharply on the answer.
Two of the largest affiliate networks on the market both publish their own conflict-resolution logic, and they point in opposite directions.
| Property | Awin | impact.com |
|---|---|---|
| What wins by default | A valid click (standard click cookie) always beats a discount code | The partner's agreed tier ("credit group") beats the discount code |
| How a discount/voucher code is treated | As a lower-priority "soft click" cookie — only wins if no valid click exists | The code only decides the outcome if both partners sit at the same tier (e.g. both "Preferred") |
| Practical consequence | A link click beats a code, regardless of whether the code was used after the click | A "Preferred" partner's link click can beat a "Standard" partner's code, even though the code was the one actually used |
| Source | Awin's own documentation on cookie types and attribution hierarchy | impact.com's own documentation on credit groups |
The point isn't that one method is "correct" — it's that there's no single global rule for who wins when two tracked parties touch the same sale. Awin's model is essentially "a valid click always wins"; impact.com's model lets your own partner-tier structure override the code itself, and only lets the code decide between two partners at an equal tier. Run a third network or a Shopify app such as Refersion, GoAffPro or Social Snowball, and expect a third, possibly different rule — check that platform's own documentation for it, don't guess.
Working directly with creators in a curated deal with no open network in between makes real stacking considerably less likely — but not zero. A link and a code are usually issued together, to the same creator, inside the same system, precisely so they can be reconciled against each other instead of treated as two competing parties. The conflict tends to show up in two other situations instead: (1) you run several parallel creator programmes at once, and two different creators genuinely touched the same customer, or (2) one creator's code leaks onto a coupon site, and someone else's click or code ends up colliding with it on the same order. Neither has a built-in, automatic resolution without a network — you have to decide, and write down, which signal takes priority before it happens, not after. The same discipline already applies here as commission clawbacks establishes for returns: put the rule in the agreement before the relationship starts.
The numbers below are hypothetical and for illustration only. This is not a real Make Influence customer case, and none of the figures are benchmarks.
Creator A has a curated deal with a brand and a tracking link that a customer clicks on Monday. The customer doesn't buy immediately. On Friday, the same customer finds Creator B's discount code on a coupon-aggregator site and uses it at checkout on a DKK 800 order, with an agreed 15% commission = DKK 120 going to whoever gets the credit.
| Hierarchy | Who gets credited the DKK 120? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Awin-style | Creator A (the link) | A valid click always beats a discount code/soft click, regardless of order |
| impact.com-style, A and B at the same partner tier | Creator B (the code) | At equal tier, the discount code decides, and the code was the one actually used |
| impact.com-style, A is "Preferred", B is "Standard" | Creator A (the link) | A higher partner tier overrides the code, regardless of whether the code was used |
Same order, same two tracking signals — three different, equally "correct" outcomes depending entirely on which platform's own policy you've configured or are subject to. That's the whole point: without knowing your platform's documented hierarchy in advance, you can't predict who actually gets credited the next time this happens.
Make Influence's model is curated, not an open network with competing partner tiers. A link and a code are issued together to each profile inside one system, specifically to minimise this kind of conflict from the outset — few of our clients' campaigns run several parallel creator programmes against the exact same customer base at once. The main lesson worth taking from this isn't technical, it's contractual: whatever the setup, how a conflict between two tracked parties gets resolved should be written down before it happens — the same discipline that applies to commission clawbacks.
There's no universal answer. It depends on your network's or platform's own, documented attribution hierarchy — see the Awin-vs-impact.com comparison above for how differently two major networks actually resolve it.
On impact.com, partly — through credit groups and partner tiers, which you configure yourself. On Awin, the cookie hierarchy is largely fixed by the cookie type itself (standard click vs. soft click), not something you freely configure from scratch.
No. Double counting is when the same creator's click and code both get counted as separate sales and inflate the total — see discount codes vs tracking links. Attribution stacking is about two different parties, where only one should be credited for the same sale.
The conflict can still arise between two different creators' links if both are clicked by the same customer before the purchase — Awin's own documentation covers that case too (the most recent valid click wins by default).
It can be a genuine part of the decision if you expect many parallel creator programmes — but it shouldn't stand alone; commission structure, fees and reach typically weigh more heavily. See how to set up an affiliate program for the full decision process.
Yes, if there's no genuine click behind one of the signals at all. See click fraud and cookie stuffing for how to tell the difference and what the major networks do about it.
Make Influence
Find creators with real audience data, run collaborations in one place, and see clicks and sales per creator while the campaign is live.
Book a demoCreate accountMake Influence
Apply to campaigns from brands that are actively looking, follow your own clicks and sales, and get paid without chasing invoices.
Create creator profileMore creator guidesMake Influence
Briefs, agreed terms, tracking links and results sit together — so brands and creators see the same numbers.
See how it worksBrowse the Academy
