What is the difference between geofencing, geotargeting, and geofarming?

Geotargeting selects a region, geofencing selects a specific place and the devices seen inside it, and geofarming works a curated list of places over time. Vendors blur these three on purpose, because geotargeting is nearly free and geofencing is not.

Geotargeting

This is ordinary location targeting. You tell Google Ads or Meta to show your ads to people in Dallas, or within 25 miles of a zip code, or in a list of counties. It is built into every major ad platform, it costs nothing extra, and it has no separate minimum. If someone quotes you a premium for geotargeting, you are paying for a setting.

Geofencing

This is place level targeting. You draw a polygon around a specific building or lot and build an audience out of the mobile devices observed inside it. That audience can then be retargeted for weeks after the visit, and their later visits to your own location can be measured. It requires a demand side platform and location data you do not get from Google or Meta directly. LevelUp's minimum for geofencing is $5,000 per month in ad spend.

Geofarming

Geofarming is the disciplined version: a standing list of places fenced continuously, with results compared place by place, and the losers dropped. Real estate agents farm neighborhoods this way. Dealerships farm a set of competitor lots. The value is not any single fence, it is the accumulated audience and the ability to say which locations actually produce customers.

Which one you need

Most businesses need geotargeting and nothing more. Geofencing earns its cost when where someone physically stands is a real buying signal, and when you have the budget to run it long enough to learn something. If you are choosing between spending $5,000 on geofencing and $5,000 on search, take search. Search catches people already looking.

Related: What is geofencing advertising and how does it work?, What is addressable geofencing?, What budget do these channels need?.