---
id: "concept-relative-proximity"
type: "concept"
source_timestamps: ["§ A Better Predictor of Ad Effects", "¶5"]
tags: ["spatial-analytics", "targeting-metrics", "competitive-geography"]
related: ["concept-absolute-proximity", "claim-relative-proximity-outperforms", "action-incorporate-competitor-locations", "concept-work-location-proximity", "entity-home-depot", "entity-lowes"]
definition: "A targeting metric based on whether a consumer is geographically closer to the advertising retailer than to a direct competitor, rather than just measuring sheer distance."
sources: ["tail1"]
sourceVaultSlug: "hbr-seg-tail1"
originDay: 1
articleStem: "hbr-tail-115-location-based-advertising"
sourceUrl: "https://hbr.org/2026/03/a-better-strategy-for-location-based-advertising"
sourceTitle: "A Better Strategy for Location-Based Advertising"
---
# Relative Proximity Targeting

Relative proximity is the core idea of this source: it shifts location-based advertising from **absolute distance** (see [[concept-absolute-proximity]]) to **competitive geography**. In markets where competitors carry similar assortments at similar prices — the canonical example is [[entity-home-depot]] vs. [[entity-lowes]] — convenience is the primary differentiator, so the question that predicts a visit is not "how far away is this customer?" but "is this customer closer to us than to the rival?"

## What the six-year study found
- Customers who live **closer to the advertising retailer than to a rival** respond significantly more to that retailer's ads.
- Critically, the gap in ad responsiveness between **'closer-to-us'** and **'closer-to-rival'** customers is *substantially larger* than the gap between customers who are simply **'close'** versus **'far'** from the store. This is the empirical heart of [[claim-relative-proximity-outperforms]].
- The **most persuadable segment** often consists of customers who are *far from the focal store in absolute terms* (e.g., **over six miles**) but are still **relatively closer to it than to the competitor**. Traditional radius-based targeting entirely misses this highly responsive segment.

## Why it matters operationally
Because relative proximity depends on competitor positions, executing it starts with a concrete data move: [[action-incorporate-competitor-locations]] — overlay rival locations and prioritize the areas where you are the closer option. The metric also generalizes beyond the home address: [[concept-work-location-proximity]] shows that a workplace relatively closer to your store than to a rival's is just as predictive.

## Enrichment context
The *mechanism* is well supported by decades of retail-geography theory: **gravity models and the Huff model** have long modeled store choice as a function of *relative* distance and store attractiveness among competitors, effectively operationalizing "closer than rivals." Behavioral **proximity-nudge** research (people disproportionately choose the nearest option among alternatives) also supports the general mechanism. However, the *specific performance uplift* over radius targeting rests on the authors' proprietary dataset and is **not independently corroborated** in open literature — see [[claim-relative-proximity-outperforms]] for the confidence read.


## Related across articles
- [[claim-regional-labor-markets-dictate]]
- [[concept-competitor-centric-strategy]]