This article was also published for Wrestlenomics subscribers. Signup now on Patreon or Substack to unlock access to paywalled and ad-free reporting and analysis on the business of pro wrestling.
For the first time, we can compare how the same episodes of four major weekly wrestling programs score under Nielsen’s new and old TV ratings systems: the previous panel-only method and the new Big Data + Panel method.
While the results have varied, and in many cases sports have benefited from the change, WWE SmackDown on USA Network, WWE NXT on CW, AEW Dynamite on TBS, and AEW Collision on TNT saw abrupt declines in viewership when the new method took effect coinciding with the new television season in late September, which was demonstrated in our analysis last week.
Now we have data for each episode of SmackDown, Dynamite, and Collision in both methodologies.
In a few cases, Big Data + Panel actually measured higher in total viewership for the AEW programs, but that has generally been the exception. While Dynamite Big Data + Panel measurements showed signs in recent weeks of closing the gap with the old panel-only method, the gap for SmackDown has been more consistent. And AEW Collision, possibly because of its smaller audience provides a smaller sample, has varied the most.
We weren’t able to obtain individual data points for NXT on CW, but we were informed by a source with knowledge of the data that over the same timeline, NXT has measured 9% lower on average in total viewership under the new system, and it’s been down most of all in ad demos: 27% lower in P18-49 and 29% lower in the overlapping P25-54.
The declines across the four programs are consistent with the deltas we see in the before-and-after comparison detailed last week.
For the CW Network, NXT is its leading show in primetime, and it still is under the new methodology, though the gap isn’t as wide anymore.
CW expressed concern to us in a statement, about what they say is the unexplained discrepancy.
“We’ve expressed to Nielsen our deep frustration with the way it handled the process, communication, and methodology behind its Big Data rollout,” the broadcast network stated to Wrestlenomics.
The statement went on to question the credibility of the new methodology.
“The sudden and substantial discrepancy in WWE NXT viewership reported by Big Data, relative to long-established viewing patterns, is inexplicable and lacks credibility,” the network continued. “Further, a comparison with data from all other measurement products (including others from Nielsen itself) exposes a fundamentally flawed methodology in Big Data. We are disappointed by Nielsen’s lack of cooperation, transparency, and accountability with its network partners as we work to resolve this issue.”
Nielsen did not respond to multiple inquiries to provide comments for this story, including requests to offer an explanation about why wrestling programs in particular seem to be impacted under Big Data + Panel.
USA Network parent Versant, TBS and TNT parent Warner Bros. Discovery, AEW, and WWE were also contacted and did not provide on-the-record comments.
Significant changes in how wrestling telecasts measure are important because WWE and AEW alike depend on television as their biggest sources of revenue. Big Data + Panel is now a key currency networks and advertisers use. The four programs focused on here alone account for about $500 million in annual rights fees domestically. Any systematic shift in how wrestling programs are counted affects how those shows could be valued in media rights negotiations, how their performance is evaluated internally, and what the industry believes about who is actually watching.
Big Data + Panel uses the traditional panel sample used for decades by Nielsen, and combines it with set-top boxes and smart TV data. In a press release in September, Nielsen said the panel consists of more than 42,000 households and the new big data is sourced from an additional 45 million households — roughly one third of the nation. At least in theory, a much larger sample sounds like it should produce more accurate data.
The Media Rating Council (MRC) is a nonprofit entity created in the 1960s at the request of U.S. Congress to accredit companies like Nielsen that provide important measurements that impact industries like television and advertising.
A report last month from Marketing Brew said the MRC was weighing whether to strip Nielsen’s Big Data + Panel accreditation or give Nielsen more time to correct several technical and methodological concerns. Losing accreditation could be a significant setback for a product Nielsen promoted as a turning point in TV measurement.
MRC CEO and Executive Director George W. Ivie responded with a statement sent after the initial publishing of this article, confirming that Nielsen’s national television measurement service, including Big Data and certain live sports streaming integrations, are still accredited by MRC.
“Our process is annual and we conduct rigorous annual audits of the service to reaffirm that status,” Ivie wrote to us on Friday morning. “Our evaluation of the service for 2025 is ongoing. We cannot comment on any further specifics.”
He reiterated that “certain live sports events are integrated into Nielsen’s service through streaming integrations where Nielsen ingests first party streaming data (for example, from Amazon or Netflix) and incorporates that information into its measurement methodology. We believe this process is good for measurement quality.”
He pondered whether integrating streaming measurements would help ratings for the wrestling programs we inquired about.
“I wonder if the events you are referencing [telecasts of SmackDown, NXT, Dynamite, and Collision] would benefit from integrations like this,” Ivie said, though, it’s notable that only Dynamite and Collision are currently simulcast on streaming. SmackDown and NXT air live exclusively on their traditional networks, USA Network and CW respectively.
We asked in our earlier inquiry to MRC whether Nielsen’s accredited methodology includes any category based distinctions or duration rules that might treat long live sports telecasts differently from long live entertainment telecasts — a distinction that some have theorized might explain why sports are generally fairing much better under the new methodology than wrestling, which might not be categorized as sports.
“[W]e are not aware of any specific methodological adjustments that would treat long live sporting events differentially from long entertainment events, other than the [streaming] integration opportunity I note above,” Ivie responded.
We also provided MRC with the differences in viewership for the seven weeks before and seven weeks after, for each of the four weekly wrestling programs focused on in this report, showing that under Big Data + Panel, each program’s viewership has measured been significantly lower since the change.
“I haven’t seen the figures you are quoting in your email,” Ivie said, “but we will certainly consider these as we evaluate the service going forward.”
Most sports telecasts seem to be doing just fine under the new methodology, however.
William Mao is Senior Vice President of Media Rights Consulting for Octagon, a sports and entertainment agency that advises leagues, networks, and advertisers on media strategy, rights valuations, and audience trends. While he has not studied the wrestling data itself, he helped clarify how Big Data + Panel is being viewed across the broader television industry.
“We have more often seen larger audience results on a same-store basis (same programming, same channel, similar window), and Nielsen itself was suggesting that Live Sports should see a 5-10% lift from the methodology move,” he said.
“I think there is general recognition by broadcasters and rights holders alike that a methodology change like the move to Big Data + Panel (or Nielsen’s prior change to its OOH [out-of-home] measurement) will result in a non-normative shift in viewership results, but that the change is with an eye towards being more accurate in the measurement,” he added.
The wrestling programs considered here naturally share certain attributes that might be influencing the difference. All four of these programs run about two hours. They include segments of varying length that influence changes in viewership throughout the course of the program.
But no network or distributor has yet provided an explanation for why all four weekly wrestling shows track lower to this degree under the new system.
Patrick Crakes, who runs the strategic advisory firm Crakes Media and previously spent many years in senior roles at Fox Sports, spoke with us by phone on Thursday.
He noted that out-of-home viewing tends to help other sports more than wrestling. You aren’t likely to see pro wrestling on the TV at a sports bar, for example. He said it was also possible that the 45 million Big Data homes Nielsen added to its sample include many broadband-only households without pay TV access, which could make wrestling harder to capture in the new dataset.
“Either the methodology is dinging wrestling because some viewers can’t be seen in the Big Data homes, or the old panel was overindexing on wrestling viewing and this is evening it out,” Crakes suggested as possible explanations.
It’s less than two months since the Big Data + Panel became the primary viewership methodology, which Crakes says is still too soon to know whether impacts as much as 29% to key demographics, like in the case of NXT’s P25-54 demo, are permanent.
“It’s certainly disruption and uncomfortable,” he said. “And you want to get it sorted out. Because if you’re running 20% lower next year, that’s just the new world.”
But even if it is a permanent change for wrestling, Crakes believes the media rights values that WWE and AEW so heavily depend on won’t be seriously impacted.
“The value overall for wrestling will remain strong, but there will be some impact because of this, primarily on the advertising side.”
Rather than total viewership, the key advertising age groups are what drive ad value for television programs. Advertising challenges are familiar to wrestling programs.
“Wrestling is harder to sell than the other sports. It just has a smaller group of advertisers,” Crakes said.
As the television industry, and the wrestling industry in particular, continues to adjust to Big Data + Panel, the coming months will show whether these early gaps hold, grow, or shrink. For now, side-by-side comparisons provide the clearest picture yet of how the new system is counting wrestling audiences, and they raise questions ultimately only Nielsen can answer.