Sequential tasks enforce order. Where a non-sequential offer lets a user complete steps in any order and credits each as it lands, a sequential one requires progression: install, then reach a milestone, then spend. Step three cannot credit before step two.

How it works

The advertiser defines the steps and marks them as ordered. The user completes the first, is rewarded, and the second becomes available. Completing a later action out of order does not credit, because the funnel logic treats it as not yet reached. This matters for how a wall presents the offer, since a user who cannot see the order will attempt whatever looks easiest and earn nothing.

Why advertisers use them

Sequential structures let an advertiser pay for a journey instead of an entry point. Rather than buying an install and hoping for engagement, the advertiser prices each stage of retention and only pays for the stages users actually reach. It maps directly onto how retention works in practice, and it is the structure behind funnel payment models such as MRCPE.

What good presentation looks like

• Show all steps up front. Users decide whether an offer is worth starting based on the whole path, not the first rung.

• Mark completed steps clearly. Progress a user cannot see is progress they will not finish.

• Show the reward per step and the total. Both numbers matter: one is the next payoff, the other is the reason to continue.

• Indicate what is currently available. Users who attempt a locked step and receive nothing assume the offer is broken.

Sequential tasks and completion rates

Sequential offers convert at progressively lower rates with each step, which is expected rather than a fault. The right way to judge one is total earnings across the whole funnel, not the completion rate of the final step. A wall that ranks these offers on last-step conversion will consistently undervalue them, which is what EPC across the full offer is there to correct.

Sequential vs. parallel steps

Parallel multi-step offers let a user complete any step at any time and credit each independently, which suits offers where the actions are genuinely unrelated. Sequential offers model a journey, where each step only makes sense after the last. The distinction matters for presentation more than for payment: a parallel offer shown as a sequence discourages users who cannot do step one, and a sequential offer shown as a checklist sends users to attempt steps that will not credit.

Common mistakes to avoid

• Presenting sequential steps as an unordered list. Users attempt them in the wrong order and earn nothing.

• Hiding later steps until earlier ones complete. It makes a high-value offer look like a low-value one.

• Judging the offer on the first step alone. Most of the payout usually sits further down.

• Assuming every multi-step offer is sequential. Many are not, and treating them as though they were misleads the user.