All who sign up to Wizzley will receive a 50/50 share of the revenue on their articles. Half of the time, your work will display your own advertisements. The other half belong to Wizzley. As you write more, you get a higher percentage within that cycle. The highest is 60/40 to the writer.
The Wizzley team have opted to show Adsense during their 40-50% revenue time. If you are using Chitika, a disparity is immediately obvious.
While your adverts are showing, there are just two blocks of them. One is at the top, under the main headings; and one is at the bottom, before the comments section.
While the Wizzley adverts are showing, there are more than double the number of ad blocks. In addition to filling the areas where your Chitika ones were placed, there are three more. An image advert is displayed below your profile section, while a small list unit is in the center of the right-hand column. At the foot of the same column is another image advertizement.
In short, Wizzley (and any writers who choose Adsense) have twice as many opportunities to monetize articles, as you will with Chitika.
Try not to take this personally. ChefKeem and the team, along with Chitika, are all doing their very best in difficult circumstances. Wizzley's technical staff cannot put more ad blocks in, because the alternatives do not exist. They could insert something similar to what's already there, but that would look very repetitive and, frankly, rubbish.
So moving one layer out, we look at the advert provider and wonder why they don't have more varying blocks to offer. The reason is that the company is doing what it can to survive in a monopolized industry.
No-one is going to choose a lesser known brand over the fore-runner, especially when that is as familiar and ubiquitous as Google. Therefore, Chitika has made its name by signing up people willing to diversify. That is to run both providers, side by side, on the same website. Just like Wizzley has, in fact.
Google hates this and it has the dominance to stamp out the practice with policy. In 2005, when Chitika was an up-and-coming ad supplier, Google inserted, into their Adsense Terms and Conditions, this notice:
Competitive Ads and Services
We do not permit Google ads or search boxes accessing Google search services to be published on web pages that also contain what could be considered competing ads or services. This would include ads that mimic Google ads or otherwise appear to be associated with Google on your site. If you have elected to receive content-based Google ads, this would also include all other content-targeted ads. If you have elected to receive Google search services, this would include other search services on the same site and non-Google query-targeted ads. We do allow affiliate or limited-text links.
It instantly forced website owners into an either/or situation, which Adsense was bound to win. Many competitors went out of business. That policy has since been relaxed slightly, but the current one still reads 'publishers may not display Google ads or search boxes on websites that also contain other ads or services formatted to use the same layout and colors as the Google ads or search boxes on that site.'
Chitika was one of the few which managed to get around it. Their designers created adverts which didn't mimic Adsense in any way, shape or form. But given the vast array of formats available via Google, this is extremely limiting.
Following that through from the start: service users (me and you) have allowed an internet monopoly by an ad provider. That corporation has used its dominance to attempt to stamp out the opposition. The chief survivor has exploited a TOS loophole to keep going. That loophole restricts the blocks it can offer; and Wizzley has published all that it can from the stock.
This is why Chitika publishers here have fewer adverts on display around their articles.