Salesforce Marketing-Cloud-Intelligence Exam Dumps

Based on the Opportunity file and considering the filter dates from January 7th to 10th, the different stages presented are 'Interest', 'Confirmed Interest', and 'Registered'. This makes a total of 3 different stages that would be presented in the pivot table. Salesforce Marketing Cloud Intelligence allows for the creation of pivot tables that can display counts of entities across different dimensions, in this case, Opportunity Stages. Reference to Salesforce Marketing Cloud Intelligence documentation that covers data mapping and pivot table creation would support this conclusion.

Option 4 presents two calculated measurements for 'Group Min Cost' with 'MIN' and 'AVG' aggregations. This approach aligns with the client's need for the minimum and average media cost values. 'Group Min Cost 4 MIN' will calculate the minimum media cost across the 'Media Buy Key', while 'Group Min Cost 4 FINAL' will average these minimum costs at the 'Campaign Key' level. This will yield the desired result where minimum costs are calculated at the Media Buy Key level and then averaged at the Campaign Key level.

The source file shows data related to media buys, including a 'Media Buy Key', 'Media Buy Name', 'Campaign Key', and 'Site Key', among other fields. If only three rows were added, and the discrepancy is due to a missing field, it's likely that 'Campaign Key' is the field not mapped, because it is crucial for linking related records in the data stream. Without the 'Campaign Key', the system cannot associate the media buy data with specific campaigns, leading to a potential loss of data rows during ingestion.

To set Google DV360 as the source of truth for cost:

The cost data from Google DV360 should be prioritized, which means ensuring that the 'Cost' field in Google Campaign Manager is not mapped or is mapped with less priority compared to Google DV360.

Given that DV360 is to be the source of truth, you do not want competing cost data from Campaign Manager. Unmapping 'Cost' in Google Campaign Manager prevents conflicting data between the two sources and upholds the integrity of the cost data coming from Google DV360.

For the given use case, where the Twitter Ads data stream needs to be enriched with classifications from three other sources, the correct implementation would involve creating links between the various fields across these files.

Option A is correct because it shows the correct usage of the fields from the classification files:

'Creative ID' in the Creative Classification file is linked to the 'Creative Key' in the Twitter Ads data, allowing for enrichment with creative details.

'Placement ID' in the Placement Classification file is linked to a corresponding field in the Twitter Ads data, allowing for placement details to be added.

'Category' in the Campaign Category Classification file is linked back to 'Campaign Category' in the Twitter Ads data, thus enriching the campaign data with the correct categories.

This configuration correctly uses VLOOKUP to enrich the Twitter Ads data stream with additional details from the classification files, aligning with best practices for data integration and enrichment in Marketing Cloud Intelligence.