Why The Trade Desk CEO Thinks the Open Internet Just Got Stronger

For years, the dominant narrative in digital advertising has centered on consolidation. Google and Meta built enormous walled gardens powered by first-party data. Amazon emerged as a retail media powerhouse. Streaming platforms increasingly signed direct deals with major ecosystems. Against that backdrop, many investors assumed the open internet was gradually losing ground.

But during The Trade Desk’s (TTD 1.75%) fourth-quarter 2025 earnings call, CEO Jeff Green pushed back on that assumption. His argument was straightforward – and surprisingly optimistic: The open internet may actually be strengthening, which is positive for the company’s long-term prospects.

Image source: Getty Images.

The supply-demand shift

Green’s core thesis rests on a macro dynamic. In 2025, advertising supply grew faster than demand. That matters. When supply is scarce – for example, when only a handful of platforms control most impressions – those platforms enjoy pricing power. Advertisers have limited alternatives, and ecosystems can bundle inventory, data, and measurement into a single package.

But when supply expands faster than demand, advertisers gain leverage. They can compare impressions across publishers, negotiate rates, and optimize spending more aggressively. In this environment, objective decision-making becomes more valuable.

That’s where The Trade Desk fits in. As an independent demand-side platform (DSP), it doesn’t own inventory. It doesn’t prioritize one publisher over another. It positions itself as a neutral optimization engine across the open internet. In a supply-heavy market, that neutrality becomes an advantage – at least in theory.

Expand

NASDAQ: TTD

The Trade Desk

Today’s Change

(-1.75%) $-0.52

Current Price

$29.27

Key Data Points

Market Cap

$14B

Day’s Range

$28.04 - $29.47

52wk Range

$21.08 - $91.45

Volume

3.9K

Avg Vol

17M

Gross Margin

78.63%

Why neutrality matters even more now

Green also emphasized a related point. Advertisers increasingly care about measurable performance, not just reach. In fragmented markets with abundant supply, advertisers want to know which impressions drive the best outcomes – not simply where they can buy scale. A neutral DSP allows brands to compare performance across multiple publishers rather than relying on self-reported results from a single ecosystem.

If advertisers continue demanding cross-channel transparency, the open internet will strengthen. Optimization matters more than control. From that perspective, the rise of AI doesn’t necessarily favor walled gardens. It could favor platforms that apply AI across diverse inventory sources.

Kokai, The Trade Desk’s AI engine, aims to do precisely that – optimizing bids, impression scoring, and budget allocation across publishers. In other words, if performance-driven buying becomes the dominant mode, neutrality could become a strategic edge rather than a defensive position.

The counterargument: Ecosystems still hold enormous power

Of course, this thesis has limits. Large ecosystems still control massive pools of authenticated data and premium inventory. Amazon’s growing presence in connected TV and retail media gives it direct access to both consumer intent and streaming audiences. Google and Meta continue embedding AI deeply into their platforms.

Scale and data remain powerful advantages. Moreover, convenience matters. Some advertisers prefer integrated solutions that bundle media buying, measurement, and attribution inside one ecosystem – even if that limits cross-platform transparency. If advertisers prioritize simplicity over neutrality, the open internet’s relative strength weakens.

There is also the structural risk that premium inventory becomes more concentrated through exclusive or preferential deals. If too much premium supply migrates into a few ecosystems, the open internet becomes narrower, regardless of theoretical supply abundance.

Not a winner-take-all game

While the bulls and bears have their merits, the reality likely sits somewhere in between. The open internet hasn’t disappeared. Retailers, broadcasters, streaming platforms, and publishers continue to monetize outside closed ecosystems. Programmatic infrastructure remains active and competitive. At the same time, however, walled gardens remain formidable players.

Green’s argument doesn’t suggest the open internet is dominating. Instead, it indicates that a fragmented, supply-rich environment increases the importance of independent optimization. In that kind of environment, The Trade Desk positions itself as an arbitrator, helping advertisers navigate complexity rather than locking them into a single ecosystem. If that arbitrator role grows more valuable over time, the open internet doesn’t weaken. It evolves.

What does it mean for investors?

Green’s claim that the open internet just got stronger may sound contrarian. But it reflects a structural view of how markets behave when supply expands, and performance becomes paramount.

Whether that thesis proves correct will depend less on rhetoric and more on execution. The open internet isn’t guaranteed to win. But it isn’t fading quietly either. And for The Trade Desk, the distinction probably lies in how well it executes and adapts in this changing competitive landscape.