{"id":1355,"date":"2026-05-11T07:15:07","date_gmt":"2026-05-11T07:15:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/?p=1355"},"modified":"2026-05-11T07:17:55","modified_gmt":"2026-05-11T07:17:55","slug":"earnouts-in-ecommerce-ma-pros-and-cons","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/earnouts-in-ecommerce-ma-pros-and-cons\/","title":{"rendered":"Earnouts in Ecommerce M&amp;A: Pros, Cons &amp; Structure"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p><em>More ecommerce deals are getting structured with earnouts in 2026 than at any point in the past five years. The reason is simple: buyers are pricing in slower DTC growth, more skeptical of trailing twelve-month numbers driven by performance marketing, and reluctant to pay full multiples upfront on businesses they cannot fully validate. Earnouts have become the negotiation tool that closes the gap between what sellers expect and what buyers will commit to in cash on day one. For the right deal they unlock a higher headline price. For the wrong deal they leave 20% to 40% of the purchase price permanently uncollected.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This guide covers how earnouts actually work in ecommerce M&amp;A, the structures buyers propose most often, the specific risks sellers underestimate, the metrics that determine whether the money ever lands, and the negotiation moves that protect the seller&#8217;s downside. If you are weighing an LOI right now and an earnout is on the table, read this before signing anything.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If you have not yet locked down deal structure basics, start with our <a href=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/asset-sale-vs-stock-sale-ecommerce-exits\/\">guide to asset sale vs stock sale for ecommerce exits<\/a> before going deeper on earnouts. The two decisions interact, and an earnout layered on top of the wrong sale structure can create tax problems that erase the upside.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>What an Earnout Is and Why Ecommerce Deals Use Them<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>An earnout is a portion of the purchase price that is paid to the seller after closing, contingent on the business hitting agreed performance targets. The targets can be revenue, gross profit, EBITDA, customer retention, or operational milestones. The measurement period typically runs 12 to 36 months after close. If targets are hit, the seller collects the additional payments. If targets are missed, the seller collects nothing or a reduced amount.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Earnouts solve a specific problem. Buyers and sellers often have honest disagreements about what the business will look like 18 months after the transaction. The seller has watched the brand grow, sees the new product launches in the pipeline, and prices the deal at what the business should be worth. The buyer has watched dozens of DTC deals where post-close revenue dropped 20% to 35% within a year, and prices the deal at what they can defend if growth flatlines. Rather than walk away from each other, both sides agree to bridge the gap with a contingent payment structure.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In 2026 ecommerce specifically, three forces are pushing more deals toward earnouts. Performance marketing efficiency has become harder to underwrite. Aggregator demand has cooled compared to the 2021 peak, so strategic buyers and search funds, who tend to use earnouts more often, now make up a larger share of the buyer pool. And the gap between asking multiples and closing multiples has widened, which earnouts paper over by allowing the headline number to stay attractive while the cash at close moves down.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>The most common misconception about earnouts:<\/strong> sellers treat the contingent portion as part of the price they are getting paid. It is not. It is a payment they might collect if the business performs to a standard the buyer set. Default to assuming earnouts will pay out at 50% of the maximum, not 100%, when you are evaluating a structured offer.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>How Earnouts Are Typically Structured in Ecommerce Deals<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>There are five structural variables in every earnout. Each one is negotiable, and small changes in any of them have large effects on whether the seller actually collects the money.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What sellers should examine in any earnout proposal:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Total earnout amount as a percentage of headline price (typical range: 15% to 35%)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Measurement period (typical: 12, 24, or 36 months from close)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Performance metric (revenue, gross profit, EBITDA, contribution margin, or operational KPI)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Threshold structure (binary cliff, sliding scale, or tiered milestones)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Payment cadence (single lump payment at the end, annual tranches, or quarterly)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Acceleration clauses (what triggers payout if the buyer sells, restructures, or breaches)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Seller protections (operational covenants, audit rights, and dispute resolution)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"749\" height=\"422\" src=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/image-27.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1359\"\/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p>The three structures that show up most often in $1M to $10M SDE ecommerce deals are these. Tiered milestone earnouts pay a percentage of the contingent amount each year that targets are hit, which is the seller-friendly default and what brokers will push for. Cliff earnouts pay nothing unless a single threshold is met by the end of the period, which is buyer-friendly and aggressive. Sliding-scale earnouts pay a proportional amount based on how close the business comes to the target, which is the fairest structure for both sides and the easiest to negotiate to a clean close.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Strategic acquirers prefer tiered structures because they want the seller engaged and motivated through the full integration period. Search funds and individual operators prefer cliff structures because they want all the upside if they outperform and none of the obligation if they fall short. Aggregators, when they are still in the conversation, tend to use sliding-scale structures with shorter measurement windows.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>The single most common structural mistake sellers make:<\/strong> agreeing to a cliff earnout without a sliding scale below the threshold. A cliff earnout that pays out at 100% of revenue target and zero at 99% is not a deal protection, it is a coin flip. Always negotiate at minimum a 50% sliding scale starting at 80% of target.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>The Pros: Why Earnouts Make Sense for Sellers<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Earnouts are not inherently bad for sellers. Used well, they are the mechanism that lets sellers capture upside they would otherwise have to leave on the table. Three specific scenarios make earnouts genuinely seller-favorable.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Scenario one: the buyer values the business at a discount to recent performance.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If the buyer is offering 3.5x SDE on a business you genuinely believe is worth 4.5x because of new product launches in flight, an earnout structure can capture the gap. You take a 3.5x cash close and a 1x contingent payment that pays out if the next 12 months perform as you expect. If you are right about the business, you collect the full multiple. If you are wrong, you take the cash you negotiated. The earnout is the mechanism that lets your view of the business be tested with real money.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Scenario two: a strategic buyer with synergies you cannot capture alone.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Strategic acquirers often offer above-market multiples because they can grow the business faster than you can post-close: better distribution, more capital, complementary product lines, brand portfolio leverage. An earnout that pays out on the combined performance of the asset post-integration lets you participate in the upside the buyer is actually creating, not just the baseline you would have hit alone. This is where strategic earnouts can pay out at multiples of the original contingent amount.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Scenario three: the alternative is no deal at all.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>In a market where the spread between buyer offers and seller asks is wide, an earnout is sometimes the only thing that closes. If the choice is a 70% cash close at a 3.5x effective multiple plus an earnout that brings it to 4.2x, versus walking away with no offer at all, the earnout deal is structurally better than the alternative. The discipline is to evaluate the cash portion as if the earnout will pay nothing and ask whether the cash alone is acceptable. If yes, take the deal. If no, the structure is not protective enough.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What a well-structured earnout protects:<\/strong> the seller is paid the cash close at a multiple they would accept as a clean deal, with the contingent payment serving as a bonus for outperformance, not a precondition for an acceptable outcome.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>The Cons: Why Sellers Lose Money on Earnouts<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The risks of earnouts are concentrated in the period after the seller loses operational control. Most earnout disputes are not fraud or bad faith. They are predictable consequences of structures that did not anticipate how the business would actually run under new ownership.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"749\" height=\"422\" src=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/image-25.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1357\"\/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What can go wrong after close:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Buyer cuts marketing spend to improve short-term margins, which depresses the revenue or gross profit metric the earnout is measured against<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Buyer integrates the business into a larger entity and shared overhead, fees, or transfer pricing reduce the standalone EBITDA used for measurement<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Buyer launches competing products under their own brand that cannibalize the acquired brand<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Buyer reallocates inventory, working capital, or fulfillment resources that the seller had relied on to hit growth targets<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Buyer changes the product mix, pricing strategy, or channel emphasis in ways that prioritize their roadmap over short-term hit-the-target growth<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Buyer goes through their own financial difficulty and slow-pays or disputes the earnout calculation<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Buyer sells the business mid-earnout-period to a third party who has no obligation under the original structure<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>None of these scenarios require bad faith. They require the buyer to make rational decisions about their own business that happen to reduce the seller&#8217;s payout. The earnout dispute landscape is full of cases where the seller and buyer both believe they acted reasonably and the earnout is the casualty.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>The single most expensive earnout mistake:<\/strong> agreeing to measure the earnout against EBITDA rather than gross profit or revenue when the buyer is a strategic that will integrate the business. EBITDA is the most manipulable metric in the post-close environment because the buyer controls every line item below gross profit: salaries, allocated overhead, intercompany fees, and management charges. Sellers who agreed to EBITDA-based earnouts in 2023 to 2024 deals are the largest single category of earnout disputes EcomSwap has tracked.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>The Metrics That Determine Whether Earnouts Pay Out<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Choosing the right performance metric is the highest-leverage decision in any earnout negotiation. The metric determines who controls the outcome, how cleanly performance can be measured, and how vulnerable the seller is to post-close decisions made by someone else.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<figure class=\"wp-block-image size-full\"><img decoding=\"async\" width=\"749\" height=\"422\" src=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/image-26.jpg\" alt=\"\" class=\"wp-image-1358\"\/><\/figure>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Revenue-based earnouts<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Revenue is the seller-friendliest metric because it is the hardest to manipulate. Top-line gross sales are reported by Shopify, Amazon, and the payment processors, and the buyer cannot easily make revenue disappear without also affecting their own reporting. Revenue earnouts are the cleanest to measure and resolve.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What to document in a revenue earnout:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>The exact revenue definition (gross sales, net of returns, or net of returns and discounts)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Which platforms and channels are included<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>How wholesale, B2B, or marketplace revenue is treated<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>The reporting source of truth (Shopify analytics, payment processor, GAAP-reported revenue)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Gross profit earnouts<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Gross profit is the middle ground. It accounts for the buyer&#8217;s right to manage COGS but protects the seller from below-the-line manipulation. Gross profit earnouts are appropriate when the buyer is making meaningful operational changes that would distort revenue (such as moving from full-price DTC to discount-driven marketplace channels), but the seller still wants protection against shared-overhead games.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>EBITDA-based earnouts<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>EBITDA is the buyer-friendliest metric and the most dangerous for sellers. Below the gross profit line, every cost the buyer adds reduces the seller&#8217;s payout. Allocated parent-company overhead, integration expenses, new hires, increased inventory carrying costs, and management fees are all legitimate operational decisions for the buyer that happen to reduce EBITDA. If you must accept an EBITDA-based earnout, negotiate detailed exclusions: no allocated parent overhead, no integration expenses, no new hires above a defined headcount, and no transfer pricing on services from the parent.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h3 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Operational milestone earnouts<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n<p>Operational milestones (such as hitting a customer count, launching specific products, reaching a subscription threshold) are useful in narrow situations: when the seller will remain in the business as a key operator and when the milestones are objectively measurable. They become problematic when the buyer controls whether the milestone is achievable (such as a product launch that depends on the buyer&#8217;s manufacturing or distribution decisions).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What to push for as the metric of choice:<\/strong> revenue first, gross profit second, EBITDA only with detailed exclusions, operational milestones only when the seller controls the operation. Never accept the buyer-proposed metric without modeling the worst case under that metric.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>How to Negotiate an Earnout That Actually Pays Out<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Most of what determines whether an earnout pays out is decided in the LOI and definitive agreement, not in the post-close performance period. The seller&#8217;s leverage to shape the structure peaks before signing and decays sharply after. Use it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What to negotiate before signing:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>A floor on the cash portion that you would accept as a clean deal regardless of earnout outcome<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Sliding-scale payouts starting at 75% to 80% of target rather than cliff structures<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Operational covenants that restrict the buyer from making material changes during the earnout period without seller consent or compensation<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A defined budget for marketing spend, headcount, and inventory that the buyer commits to maintaining<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Audit rights for the seller to review the buyer&#8217;s books during the earnout period (annually at minimum)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Acceleration clauses if the buyer sells the business, has a change of control, or breaches operational covenants<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Dispute resolution through a defined process (independent accountant, arbitration) rather than litigation<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>A clear true-up mechanism that recalculates if the buyer makes structural changes mid-period<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>Many of these protections are easier to win when they are framed correctly inside the LOI. For a full breakdown of what to negotiate at the LOI stage, see our Letter of Intent (LOI) Guide for Ecommerce Sellers. The LOI is where earnout terms become real, and most sellers leave money on the table by treating the LOI as a non-binding handshake.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>The negotiation move that protects sellers most:<\/strong> tie operational covenants directly to the earnout calculation. If the buyer reduces marketing spend below an agreed threshold, the earnout is automatically calculated as if the spend had been maintained. This single provision converts most post-close disputes from a question of buyer good faith to a question of contract compliance, which is far easier to enforce.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Tax and Accounting Considerations Sellers Forget<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>The tax treatment of earnout payments is materially different from the cash close, and many sellers make their earnout decisions without modeling the after-tax outcome. The structure of the earnout determines whether payments are treated as deferred purchase price (capital gains) or as compensation for ongoing services (ordinary income). The difference can be 15 to 20 percentage points of effective tax rate.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>What to model with your tax advisor before signing:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Whether the earnout will qualify for installment sale treatment under IRC 453<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>How an asset sale vs stock sale structure changes the earnout tax characterization<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Whether any portion of the earnout will be re-characterized as compensation if the seller continues working in the business<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>State tax implications, especially if the seller relocates after close<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Imputed interest treatment if the earnout period is longer than 12 months<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>For sellers who have not yet built their accurate baseline number, our <a href=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/how-to-calculate-sde-for-your-ecommerce-business-2026\/\">guide to calculating SDE for your ecommerce business<\/a> is the right starting point. The earnout is measured against numbers your buyer will scrutinize line by line, and a clean SDE bridge before the LOI saves enormous time during the diligence and earnout-design phase.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>On the accounting side, the seller needs to understand whether the buyer is going to capitalize the earnout as part of purchase price or expense it as compensation. The buyer&#8217;s tax accounting election affects how aggressively they will fight to reduce the payout, and whether they have an incentive to recharacterize the structure during the dispute period. Get this clarified in writing before signing the definitive agreement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>The single most expensive tax oversight:<\/strong> sellers who agree to earnout structures that require them to remain employed by the buyer post-close. The IRS often re-characterizes the earnout payments as ordinary compensation rather than deferred purchase price, which can cost the seller 15% to 20% of the earnout amount in additional tax. If continued employment is required, structure it as a separate consulting agreement with its own compensation, and make the earnout fully payable regardless of employment status.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>When to Walk Away from an Earnout<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Not every earnout structure is worth accepting. Some proposals are designed to look attractive on paper while leaving the seller with a high probability of collecting nothing. Recognize these patterns early.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p><strong>Earnout structures to walk away from:<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>More than 40% of headline purchase price in the contingent portion (the cash close is too low to justify the risk)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>EBITDA-based metric with no exclusions for buyer overhead, integration, or transfer pricing<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Cliff structures with no sliding scale below the threshold<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Measurement periods longer than 36 months (post-close growth assumptions become speculative)<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>No operational covenants restricting buyer behavior during the earnout period<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>No audit rights for the seller<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>No acceleration clause if the buyer sells the business mid-period<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>Dispute resolution that requires litigation rather than independent accountant arbitration<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p>If a buyer is unwilling to negotiate any of these protections, that itself is information. A buyer who genuinely expects the business to hit the targets has no reason to refuse covenants that only matter if targets are missed. A buyer who refuses every protective provision is signaling they expect the earnout to underperform and they want maximum flexibility to manage the outcome in their favor.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>This is exactly the conversation an experienced ecommerce broker should be having on the seller&#8217;s behalf during deal structuring.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>If you do not have one in your corner, our overview of <a href=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/working-with-an-ecommerce-broker\/\">working with an ecommerce broker<\/a> walks through what to expect and what good representation looks like in deals where earnouts and other structured terms are on the table.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<h2 class=\"wp-block-heading\"><strong>Bottom Line<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n<p>Earnouts are neither inherently good nor inherently bad. They are a structural tool that, used well, lets sellers capture upside they could not collect with a clean cash close, and used poorly, leaves them with a headline number on paper and significantly less cash in hand.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>The discipline is to evaluate every offer against two questions. First, is the cash portion at close acceptable as a standalone deal, assuming the earnout pays nothing? If the answer is no, the structure is not protective enough and you are gambling rather than transacting. Second, are the earnout protections (covenants, exclusions, audit rights, acceleration, dispute resolution) sufficient to make the contingent payment realistically collectible? If the answer is no, the headline price is a marketing number, not a real expectation.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>Sellers who treat earnouts as bonus upside on a clean cash deal end up satisfied with the outcome regardless of how the contingent portion lands. Sellers who treat earnouts as part of the price they are getting paid end up disappointed at minimum and litigating at worst. The framing matters more than any single negotiated provision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p>For the underlying valuation work that determines whether an earnout makes sense for your specific business, start with our <a href=\"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/dtc-brand-valuation-2026\/\">DTC Brand Valuation 2026 guide<\/a>. The right earnout structure follows from a clear-eyed view of what the business is worth today and what it could realistically be worth two to three years from now under new ownership.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>More ecommerce deals are getting structured with earnouts in 2026 than at any point in the past five years. The reason is simple: buyers are pricing in slower DTC growth, more skeptical of trailing twelve-month numbers driven by performance marketing, and reluctant to pay full multiples upfront on businesses they cannot fully validate. Earnouts have [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":1356,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rank_math_lock_modified_date":false,"jnews-multi-image_gallery":[],"jnews_single_post":{"format":"standard"},"jnews_primary_category":[],"jnews_override_counter":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1355","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/image-8.jpeg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1355","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1355"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1355\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1361,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1355\/revisions\/1361"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1356"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1355"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1355"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/ecomswap.io\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1355"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}