Pexuni
← All guides
Campaign tracking

7 UTM mistakes that make reports harder to use

UTM parameters are simple, but inconsistent conventions can fragment reports. The most reliable fix is a short documented standard and a quick review before links are distributed.

Seven mistakes to watch for

  1. Inconsistent casing: “LinkedIn” and “linkedin” may be treated as different values.
  2. Too many medium names: use an agreed vocabulary rather than improvising labels.
  3. Missing campaign context: “test2” is not meaningful months later.
  4. Broken destination URLs: confirm the URL is valid before adding parameters.
  5. Duplicate question marks: append parameters with an ampersand when the destination already has a query string.
  6. Lost parameters: check redirects and link shorteners.
  7. Personal information in URLs: never add private customer details to tracking parameters.

A two-minute review

Check the destination, source, medium, campaign, optional content label, and final URL. Open it yourself and make sure the page loads. If several people publish links, keep one shared naming reference rather than relying on memory.

Put it into practice: Use the UTM Link Builder, Social Image Resizer, or Content Brief Builder where relevant, then check the final output before publishing.

Worked example: why campaign rows become fragmented

If one email uses utm_medium=email and another uses utm_medium=e-mail, reports may show two labels for the same channel. Normalize the value before launch and avoid adding personal information to query parameters. After changing tags, test the destination and confirm the final URL is the one published.

Review your convention with the UTM naming guide and build the corrected URL in the UTM Link Builder.

Editorial note: Platform specifications and analytics interfaces change. Confirm current requirements in the channel or analytics product you use before launching a campaign.