
Recherche avancée
Autres articles (65)
-
Participer à sa traduction
10 avril 2011Vous pouvez nous aider à améliorer les locutions utilisées dans le logiciel ou à traduire celui-ci dans n’importe qu’elle nouvelle langue permettant sa diffusion à de nouvelles communautés linguistiques.
Pour ce faire, on utilise l’interface de traduction de SPIP où l’ensemble des modules de langue de MediaSPIP sont à disposition. ll vous suffit de vous inscrire sur la liste de discussion des traducteurs pour demander plus d’informations.
Actuellement MediaSPIP n’est disponible qu’en français et (...) -
Configurer la prise en compte des langues
15 novembre 2010, par kent1Accéder à la configuration et ajouter des langues prises en compte
Afin de configurer la prise en compte de nouvelles langues, il est nécessaire de se rendre dans la partie "Administrer" du site.
De là, dans le menu de navigation, vous pouvez accéder à une partie "Gestion des langues" permettant d’activer la prise en compte de nouvelles langues.
Chaque nouvelle langue ajoutée reste désactivable tant qu’aucun objet n’est créé dans cette langue. Dans ce cas, elle devient grisée dans la configuration et (...) -
Les autorisations surchargées par les plugins
27 avril 2010, par kent1Mediaspip core
autoriser_auteur_modifier() afin que les visiteurs soient capables de modifier leurs informations sur la page d’auteurs
Sur d’autres sites (10444)
-
How to Choose the Optimal Multi-Touch Attribution Model for Your Organisation
13 mars 2023, par Erin — Analytics TipsIf you struggle to connect the dots on your customer journeys, you are researching the correct solution.
Multi-channel attribution models allow you to better understand the users’ paths to conversion and identify key channels and marketing assets that assist them.
That said, each attribution model has inherent limitations, which make the selection process even harder.
This guide explains how to choose the optimal multi-touch attribution model. We cover the pros and cons of popular attribution models, main evaluation criteria and how-to instructions for model implementation.
Pros and Cons of Different Attribution Models
First Interaction
First Interaction attribution model (also known as first touch) assigns full credit to the conversion to the first channel, which brought in a lead. However, it doesn’t report other interactions the visitor had before converting.
Marketers, who are primarily focused on demand generation and user acquisition, find the first touch attribution model useful to evaluate and optimise top-of-the-funnel (ToFU).
Pros
- Reflects the start of the customer journey
- Shows channels that bring in the best-qualified leads
- Helps track brand awareness campaigns
Cons
- Ignores the impact of later interactions at the middle and bottom of the funnel
- Doesn’t provide a full picture of users’ decision-making process
Last Interaction
Last Interaction attribution model (also known as last touch) shifts the entire credit allocation to the last channel before conversion. But it doesn’t account for the contribution of all other channels.
If your focus is conversion optimization, the last-touch model helps you determine which channels, assets or campaigns seal the deal for the prospect.
Pros
- Reports bottom-of-the-funnel events
- Requires minimal data and configurations
- Helps estimate cost-per-lead or cost-per-acquisition
Cons
- No visibility into assisted conversions and prior visitor interactions
- Overemphasise the importance of the last channel (which can often be direct traffic)
Last Non-Direct Interaction
Last Non-Direct attribution excludes direct traffic from the calculation and assigns the full conversion credit to the preceding channel. For example, a paid ad will receive 100% of credit for conversion if a visitor goes directly to your website to buy a product.
Last Non-Direct attribution provides greater clarity into the bottom-of-the-funnel (BoFU). events. Yet, it still under-reports the role other channels played in conversion.
Pros
- Improved channel visibility, compared to Last-Touch
- Avoids over-valuing direct visits
- Reports on lead-generation efforts
Cons
- Doesn’t work for account-based marketing (ABM)
- Devalues the quality over quantity of leads
Linear Model
Linear attribution model assigns equal credit for a conversion to all tracked touchpoints, regardless of their impact on the visitor’s decision to convert.
It helps you understand the full conversion path. But this model doesn’t distinguish between the importance of lead generation activities versus nurturing touches.
Pros
- Focuses on all touch points associated with a conversion
- Reflects more steps in the customer journey
- Helps analyse longer sales cycles
Cons
- Doesn’t accurately reflect the varying roles of each touchpoint
- Can dilute the credit if too many touchpoints are involved
Time Decay Model
Time decay models assumes that the closer a touchpoint is to the conversion, the greater its influence. Pre-conversion touchpoints get the highest credit, while the first ones are ranked lower (5%-5%-10%-15%-25%-30%).
This model better reflects real-life customer journeys. However, it devalues the impact of brand awareness and demand-generation campaigns.
Pros
- Helps track longer sales cycles and reports on each touchpoint involved
- Allows customising the half-life of decay to improve reporting
- Promotes conversion optimization at BoFu stages
Cons
- Can prompt marketers to curtail ToFU spending, which would translate to fewer qualified leads at lower stages
- Doesn’t reflect highly-influential events at earlier stages (e.g., a product demo request or free account registration, which didn’t immediately lead to conversion)
Position-Based Model
Position-Based attribution model (also known as the U-shaped model) allocates the biggest credit to the first and the last interaction (40% each). Then distributes the remaining 20% across other touches.
For many marketers, that’s the preferred multi-touch attribution model as it allows optimising both ToFU and BoFU channels.
Pros
- Helps establish the main channels for lead generation and conversion
- Adds extra layers of visibility, compared to first- and last-touch attribution models
- Promotes budget allocation toward the most strategic touchpoints
Cons
- Diminishes the importance of lead nurturing activities as more credit gets assigned to demand-gen and conversion-generation channels
- Limited flexibility since it always assigns a fixed amount of credit to the first and last touchpoints, and the remaining credit is divided evenly among the other touchpoints
How to Choose the Right Multi-Touch Attribution Model For Your Business
If you’re deciding which attribution model is best for your business, prepare for a heated discussion. Each one has its trade-offs as it emphasises or devalues the role of different channels and marketing activities.
To reach a consensus, the best strategy is to evaluate each model against three criteria : Your marketing objectives, sales cycle length and data availability.
Marketing Objectives
Businesses generate revenue in many ways : Through direct sales, subscriptions, referral fees, licensing agreements, one-off or retainer services. Or any combination of these activities.
In each case, your marketing strategy will look different. For example, SaaS and direct-to-consumer (DTC) eCommerce brands have to maximise both demand generation and conversion rates. In contrast, a B2B cybersecurity consulting firm is more interested in attracting qualified leads (as opposed to any type of traffic) and progressively nurturing them towards a big-ticket purchase.
When selecting a multi-touch attribution model, prioritise your objectives first. Create a simple scoreboard, where your team ranks various channels and campaign types you rely on to close sales.
Alternatively, you can survey your customers to learn how they first heard about your company and what eventually triggered their conversion. Having data from both sides can help you cross-validate your assumptions and eliminate some biases.
Then consider which model would best reflect the role and importance of different channels in your sales cycle. Speaking of which….
Sales Cycle Length
As shoppers, we spend less time deciding on a new toothpaste brand versus contemplating a new IT system purchase. Factors like industry, business model (B2C, DTC, B2B, B2BC), and deal size determine the average cycle length in your industry.
Statistically, low-ticket B2C sales can happen within just several interactions. The average B2B decision-making process can have over 15 steps, spread over several months.
That’s why not all multi-touch attribution models work equally well for each business. Time-decay suits better B2B companies, while B2C usually go for position-based or linear attribution.
Data Availability
Businesses struggle with multi-touch attribution model implementation due to incomplete analytics data.
Our web analytics tool captures more data than Google Analytics. That’s because we rely on a privacy-focused tracking mechanism, which allows you to collect analytics without showing a cookie consent banner in markets outside of Germany and the UK.
Cookie consent banners are mandatory with Google Analytics. Yet, almost 40% of global consumers reject it. This results in gaps in your analytics and subsequent inconsistencies in multi-touch attribution reports. With Matomo, you can compliantly collect more data for accurate reporting.
Some companies also struggle to connect collected insights to individual shoppers. With Matomo, you can cross-attribute users across browning sessions, using our visitors’ tracking feature.
When you already know a user’s identifier (e.g., full name or email address), you can track their on-site behaviours over time to better understand how they interact with your content and complete their purchases. Quick disclaimer, though, visitors’ tracking may not be considered compliant with certain data privacy laws. Please consult with a local authority if you have doubts.
How to Implement Multi-Touch Attribution
Multi-touch attribution modelling implementation is like a “seek and find” game. You have to identify all significant touchpoints in your customers’ journeys. And sometimes also brainstorm new ways to uncover the missing parts. Then figure out the best way to track users’ actions at those stages (aka do conversion and events tracking).
Here’s a step-by-step walkthrough to help you get started.
Select a Multi-Touch Attribution Tool
The global marketing attribution software is worth $3.1 billion. Meaning there are plenty of tools, differing in terms of accuracy, sophistication and price.
To make the right call prioritise five factors :
- Available models : Look for a solution that offers multiple options and allows you to experiment with different modelling techniques or develop custom models.
- Implementation complexity : Some providers offer advanced data modelling tools for creating custom multi-touch attribution models, but offer few out-of-the-box modelling options.
- Accuracy : Check if the shortlisted tool collects the type of data you need. Prioritise providers who are less dependent on third-party cookies and allow you to identify repeat users.
- Your marketing stack : Some marketing attribution tools come with useful add-ons such as tag manager, heatmaps, form analytics, user session recordings and A/B testing tools. This means you can collect more data for multi-channel modelling with them instead of investing in extra software.
- Compliance : Ensure that the selected multi-attribution analytics software wouldn’t put you at risk of GDPR non-compliance when it comes to user privacy and consent to tracking/analysis.
Finally, evaluate the adoption costs. Free multi-channel analytics tools come with data quality and consistency trade-offs. Premium attribution tools may have “hidden” licensing costs and bill you for extra data integrations.
Look for a tool that offers a good price-to-value ratio (i.e., one that offers extra perks for a transparent price).
Set Up Proper Data Collection
Multi-touch attribution requires ample user data. To collect the right type of insights you need to set up :
- Website analytics : Ensure that you have all tracking codes installed (and working correctly !) to capture pageviews, on-site actions, referral sources and other data points around what users do on page.
- Tags : Add tracking parameters to monitor different referral channels (e.g., “facebook”), campaign types (e.g., ”final-sale”), and creative assets (e.g., “banner-1”). Tags help you get a clearer picture of different touchpoints.
- Integrations : To better identify on-site users and track their actions, you can also populate your attribution tool with data from your other tools – CRM system, A/B testing app, etc.
Finally, think about the ideal lookback window — a bounded time frame you’ll use to calculate conversions. For example, Matomo has a default windows of 7, 30 or 90 days. But you can configure a custom period to better reflect your average sales cycle. For instance, if you’re selling makeup, a shorter window could yield better results. But if you’re selling CRM software for the manufacturing industry, consider extending it.
Configure Goals and Events
Goals indicate your main marketing objectives — more traffic, conversions and sales. In web analytics tools, you can measure these by tracking specific user behaviours.
For example : If your goal is lead generation, you can track :
- Newsletter sign ups
- Product demo requests
- Gated content downloads
- Free trial account registration
- Contact form submission
- On-site call bookings
In each case, you can set up a unique tag to monitor these types of requests. Then analyse conversion rates — the percentage of users who have successfully completed the action.
To collect sufficient data for multi-channel attribution modelling, set up Goal Tracking for different types of touchpoints (MoFU & BoFU) and asset types (contact forms, downloadable assets, etc).
Your next task is to figure out how users interact with different on-site assets. That’s when Event Tracking comes in handy.
Event Tracking reports notify you about specific actions users take on your website. With Matomo Event Tracking, you can monitor where people click on your website, on which pages they click newsletter subscription links, or when they try to interact with static content elements (e.g., a non-clickable banner).
Using in-depth user behavioural reports, you can better understand which assets play a key role in the average customer journey. Using this data, you can localise “leaks” in your sales funnel and fix them to increase conversion rates.
Test and Validated the Selected Model
A common challenge of multi-channel attribution modelling is determining the correct correlation and causality between exposure to touchpoints and purchases.
For example, a user who bought a discounted product from a Facebook ad would act differently than someone who purchased a full-priced product via a newsletter link. Their rate of pre- and post-sales exposure will also differ a lot — and your attribution model may not always accurately capture that.
That’s why you have to continuously test and tweak the selected model type. The best approach for that is lift analysis.
Lift analysis means comparing how your key metrics (e.g., revenue or conversion rates) change among users who were exposed to a certain campaign versus a control group.
In the case of multi-touch attribution modelling, you have to monitor how your metrics change after you’ve acted on the model recommendations (e.g., invested more in a well-performing referral channel or tried a new brand awareness Twitter ad). Compare the before and after ROI. If you see a positive dynamic, your model works great.
The downside of this approach is that you have to invest a lot upfront. But if your goal is to create a trustworthy attribution model, the best way to validate is to act on its suggestions and then test them against past results.
Conclusion
A multi-touch attribution model helps you measure the impact of different channels, campaign types, and marketing assets on metrics that matter — conversion rate, sales volumes and ROI.
Using this data, you can invest budgets into the best-performing channels and confidently experiment with new campaign types.
As a Matomo user, you also get to do so without breaching customers’ privacy or compromising on analytics accuracy.
Start using accurate multi-channel attribution in Matomo. Get your free 21-day trial now. No credit card required.
-
Google Optimize vs Matomo A/B Testing : Everything You Need to Know
17 mars 2023, par Erin — Analytics TipsGoogle Optimize is a popular A/B testing tool marketers use to validate the performance of different marketing assets, website design elements and promotional offers.
But by September 2023, Google will sunset both free and paid versions of the Optimize product.
If you’re searching for an equally robust, but GDPR compliant, privacy-friendly alternative to Google Optimize, have a look at Matomo A/B Testing.
Integrated with our analytics platform and conversion rate optimisation (CRO) tools, Matomo allows you to run A/B and A/B/n tests without any usage caps or compromises in user privacy.
Disclaimer : Please note that the information provided in this blog post is for general informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal advice. Every situation is unique and requires a specific legal analysis. If you have any questions regarding the legal implications of any matter, please consult with your legal team or seek advice from a qualified legal professional.
Google Optimize vs Matomo : Key Capabilities Compared
This guide shows how Matomo A/B testing stacks against Google Optimize in terms of features, reporting, integrations and pricing.
Supported Platforms
Google Optimize supports experiments for dynamic websites and single-page mobile apps only.
If you want to run split tests in mobile apps, you’ll have to do so via Firebase — Google’s app development platform. It also has a free tier but paid usage-based subscription kicks in after your product(s) reaches a certain usage threshold.
Google Optimize also doesn’t support CRO experiments for web or desktop applications, email campaigns or paid ad campaigns.Matomo A/B Testing, in contrast, allows you to run experiments in virtually every channel. We have three installation options — using JavaScript, server-side technology, or our mobile tracking SDK. These allow you to run split tests in any type of web or mobile app (including games), a desktop product, or on your website. Also, you can do different email marketing tests (e.g., compare subject line variants).
A/B Testing
A/B testing (split testing) is the core feature of both products. Marketers use A/B testing to determine which creative elements such as website microcopy, button placements and banner versions, resonate better with target audiences.
You can benchmark different versions against one another to determine which variation resonates more with users. Or you can test an A version against B, C, D and beyond. This is called A/B/n testing.
Both Matomo A/B testing and Google Optimize let you test either separate page elements or two completely different landing page designs, using redirect tests. You can show different variants to different user groups (aka apply targeting criteria). For example, activate tests only for certain device types, locations or types of on-site behaviour.
The advantage of Matomo is that we don’t limit the number of concurrent experiments you can run. With Google Optimize, you’re limited to 5 simultaneous experiments. Likewise,
Matomo lets you select an unlimited number of experiment objectives, whereas Google caps the maximum choice to 3 predefined options per experiment.
Objectives are criteria the underlying statistical model will use to determine the best-performing version. Typically, marketers use metrics such as page views, session duration, bounce rate or generated revenue as conversion goals.
Multivariate testing (MVT)
Multivariate testing (MVT) allows you to “pack” several A/B tests into one active experiment. In other words : You create a stack of variants to determine which combination drives the best marketing outcomes.
For example, an MVT experiment can include five versions of a web page, where each has a different slogan, product image, call-to-action, etc. Visitors are then served with a different variation. The tracking code collects data on their behaviours and desired outcomes (objectives) and reports the results.
MVT saves marketers time as it’s a great alternative to doing separate A/B tests for each variable. Both Matomo and Google Optimize support this feature. However, Google Optimize caps the number of possible combinations at 16, whereas Matomo has no limits.
Redirect Tests
Redirect tests, also known as split URL tests, allow you to serve two entirely different web page versions to users and compare their performance. This option comes in handy when you’re redesigning your website or want to test a localised page version in a new market.
Also, redirect tests are a great way to validate the performance of bottom-of-the-funnel (BoFU) pages as a checkout page (for eCommerce websites), a pricing page (for SaaS apps) or a contact/booking form (for a B2B service businesses).
You can do split URL tests with Google Optimize and Matomo A/B Testing.
Experiment Design
Google Optimize provides a visual editor for making simple page changes to your website (e.g., changing button colour or adding several headline variations). You can then preview the changes before publishing an experiment. For more complex experiments (e.g., testing different page block sequences), you’ll have to codify experiments using custom JavaScript, HTML and CSS.
In Matomo, all A/B tests are configured on the server-side (i.e., by editing your website’s raw HTML) or client-side via JavaScript. Afterwards, you use the Matomo interface to start or schedule an experiment, set objectives and view reports.
Experiment Configuration
Marketers know how complex customer journeys can be. Multiple factors — from location and device to time of the day and discount size — can impact your conversion rates. That’s why a great CRO app allows you to configure multiple tracking conditions.
Matomo A/B testing comes with granular controls. First of all, you can decide which percentage of total web visitors participate in any given experiment. By default, the number is set to 100%, but you can change it to any other option.
Likewise, you can change which percentage of traffic each variant gets in an experiment. For example, your original version can get 30% of traffic, while options A and B receive 40% each. We also allow users to specify custom parameters for experiment participation. You can only show your variants to people in specific geo-location or returning visitors only.
Finally, you can select any type of meaningful objective to evaluate each variant’s performance. With Matomo, you can either use standard website analytics metrics (e.g., total page views, bounce rate, CTR, visit direction, etc) or custom goals (e.g., form click, asset download, eCommerce order, etc).
In other words : You’re in charge of deciding on your campaign targeting criteria, duration and evaluation objectives.
A free Google Optimize account comes with three main types of user targeting options :
- Geo-targeting at city, region, metro and country levels.
- Technology targeting by browser, OS or device type, first-party cookie, etc.
- Behavioural targeting based on metrics like “time since first arrival” and “page referrer” (referral traffic source).
Users can also configure other types of tracking scenarios (for example to only serve tests to signed-in users), using condition-based rules.
Reporting
Both Matomo and Google Optimize use different statistical models to evaluate which variation performs best.
Matomo relies on statistical hypothesis testing, which we use to count unique visitors and report on conversion rates. We analyse all user data (with no data sampling applied), meaning you get accurate reporting, based on first-hand data, rather than deductions. For that reason, we ask users to avoid drawing conclusions before their experiment participation numbers reach a statistically significant result. Typically, we recommend running an experiment for at least several business cycles to get a comprehensive report.
Google Optimize, in turn, uses Bayesian inference — a statistical method, which relies on a random sample of users to compare the performance rates of each creative against one another. While a Bayesian model generates CRO reports faster and at a bigger scale, it’s based on inferences.
Model developers need to have the necessary skills to translate subjective prior beliefs about the probability of a certain event into a mathematical formula. Since Google Optimize is a proprietary tool, you cannot audit the underlying model design and verify its accuracy. In other words, you trust that it was created with the right judgement.
In comparison, Matomo started as an open-source project, and our source code can be audited independently by anyone at any time.
Another reporting difference to mind is the reporting delays. Matomo Cloud generates A/B reports within 6 hours and in only 1 hour for Matomo On-Premise. Google Optimize, in turn, requires 12 hours from the first experiment setup to start reporting on results.
When you configure a test experiment and want to quickly verify that everything is set up correctly, this can be an inconvenience.
User Privacy & GDPR Compliance
Google Optimize works in conjunction with Google Analytics, which isn’t GDPR compliant.
For all website traffic from the EU, you’re therefore obliged to show a cookie consent banner. The kicker, however, is that you can only show an Optimize experiment after the user gives consent to tracking. If the user doesn’t, they will only see an original page version. Considering that almost 40% of global consumers reject cookie consent banners, this can significantly affect your results.
This renders Google Optimize mostly useless in the EU since it would only allow you to run tests with a fraction ( 60%) of EU traffic — and even less if you apply any extra targeting criteria.
In comparison, Matomo is fully GDPR compliant. Therefore, our users are legally exempt from displaying cookie-consent banners in most EU markets (with Germany and the UK being an exception). Since Matomo A/B testing is part of Matomo web analytics, you don’t have to worry about GDPR compliance or breaches in user privacy.
Digital Experience Intelligence
You can get comprehensive statistical data on variants’ performance with Google Optimize. But you don’t get further insights on why some tests are more successful than others.
Matomo enables you to collect more insights with two extra features :
- User session recordings : Monitor how users behave on different page versions. Observe clicks, mouse movements, scrolls, page changes, and form interactions to better understand the users’ cumulative digital experience.
- Heatmaps : Determine which elements attract the most users’ attention to fine-tune your split tests. With a standard CRO tool, you only assume that a certain page element does matter for most users. A heatmap can help you determine for sure.
Both of these features are bundled into your Matomo Cloud subscription.
Integrations
Both Matomo and Google Optimize integrate with multiple other tools.
Google Optimize has native integrations with other products in the marketing family — GA, Google Ads, Google Tag Manager, Google BigQuery, Accelerated Mobile Pages (AMP), and Firebase. Separately, other popular marketing apps have created custom connectors for integrating Google Optimize data.
Matomo A/B Testing, in turn, can be combined with other web analytics and CRO features such as Funnels, Multi-Channel Attribution, Tag Manager, Form Analytics, Heatmaps, Session Recording, and more !
You can also conveniently export your website analytics or CRO data using Matomo Analytics API to analyse it in another app.
Pricing
Google Optimize is a free tool but has usage caps. If you want to schedule more than 5 concurrent experiments or test more than 16 variants at once, you’ll have to upgrade to Optimize 360. Optimize 360 prices aren’t listed publicly but are said to be closer to six figures per year.
Matomo A/B Testing is available with every Cloud subscription (starting from €19) and Matomo On-Premise users can also get A/B Testing as a plugin (starting from €199/year). In each case, there are no caps or data limits.
Google Optimize vs Matomo A/B Testing : Comparison Table
Features/capabilities Google Optimize Matomo A/B test Supported channels Web Web, mobile, email, digital campaigns A/B testing Multivariate testing (MVT) Split URL tests Web analytics integration Native with UA/GA4 Native with Matomo
You can also migrate historical UA (GA3) data to MatomoAudience segmentation Basic Advanced Geo-targeting Technology targeting Behavioural targeting Basic Advanced Reporting model Bayesian analysis Statistical hypothesis testing Report availability Within 12 hours after setup 6 hours for Matomo Cloud
1 hour for Matomo On-PremiseHeatmaps
Included with Matomo CloudSession recordings
Included with Matomo CloudGDPR compliance Support Self-help desk on a free tier Self-help guides, user forum, email Price Free limited tier From €19 for Cloud subscription
From €199/year as plugin for On-PremiseFinal Thoughts : Who Benefits the Most From an A/B Testing Tool ?
Split testing is an excellent method for validating various assumptions about your target customers.
With A/B testing tools you get a data-backed answer to research hypotheses such as “How different pricing affects purchases ?”, “What contact button placement generates more clicks ?”, “Which registration form performs best with new app subscribers ?” and more.
Such insights can be game-changing when you’re trying to improve your demand-generation efforts or conversion rates at the BoFu stage. But to get meaningful results from CRO tests, you need to select measurable, representative objectives.
For example, split testing different pricing strategies for low-priced, frequently purchased products makes sense as you can run an experiment for a couple of weeks to get a statistically relevant sample.
But if you’re in a B2B SaaS product, where the average sales cycle takes weeks (or months) to finalise and things like “time-sensitive discounts” or “one-time promos” don’t really work, getting adequate CRO data will be harder.
To see tangible results from CRO, you’ll need to spend more time on test ideation than implementation. Your team needs to figure out : which elements to test, in what order, and why.
Effective CRO tests are designed for a specific part of the funnel and assume that you’re capable of effectively identifying and tracking conversions (goals) at the selected stage. This alone can be a complex task since not all customer journeys are alike. For SaaS websites, using a goal like “free trial account registration” can be a good starting point.
A good test also produces a meaningful difference between the proposed variant and the original version. As Nima Yassini, Partner at Deloitte Digital, rightfully argues :
“I see people experimenting with the goal of creating an uplift. There’s nothing wrong with that, but if you’re only looking to get wins you will be crushed when the first few tests fail. The industry average says that only one in five to seven tests win, so you need to be prepared to lose most of the time”.
In many cases, CRO tests don’t provide the data you expected (e.g., people equally click the blue and green buttons). In this case, you need to start building your hypothesis from scratch.
At the same time, it’s easy to get caught up in optimising for “vanity metrics” — such that look good in the report, but don’t quite match your marketing objectives. For example, better email headline variations can improve your email open rates. But if users don’t proceed to engage with the email content (e.g. click-through to your website or use a provided discount code), your efforts are still falling short.
That’s why developing a baseline strategy is important before committing to an A/B testing tool. Google Optimize appealed to many users because it’s free and allows you to test your split test strategy cost-effectively.
With its upcoming depreciation, many marketers are very committed to a more expensive A/B tool (especially when they’re not fully sure about their CRO strategy and its results).
Matomo A/B testing is a cost-effective, GDPR-compliant alternative to Google Optimize with a low learning curve and extra competitive features.
Discover if Matomo A/B Testing is the ideal Google Optimize alternative for your organization with our free 21-day trial. No credit card required.
-
5 Top Google Optimize Alternatives to Consider
17 mars 2023, par Erin — Analytics TipsGoogle Optimize is a popular conversion rate optimization (CRO) tool from Alphabet (parent company of Google). With it, you can run A/B, multivariate, and redirect tests to figure out which web page designs perform best.
Google Optimize seamlessly integrates with Google Analytics (GA). It also has a free tier. So many marketers chose it as their default A/B testing tool…until recently.
Google will sunset Google Optimize by 30 September 2023.
Starting from this date, Google will no longer support Optimize and Optimize 360 (premium edition). All experiments, active after this date, will be paused automatically and you’ll no longer have access to your historical records (unless these are exported in advance).
The better news is that you still have time to find a Google Optimize alternative — and this post will help you with that.
Disclaimer : Please note that the information provided in this blog post is for general informational purposes only and is not intended to provide legal advice. Every situation is unique and requires a specific legal analysis. If you have any questions regarding the legal implications of any matter, please consult with your legal team or seek advice from a qualified legal professional.
Best Google Optimize Alternatives
Google Optimize was among the first free A/B testing apps. But as with any product, it has some disadvantages.
Data updates happen every 24 hours, not in real-time. A free account has caps on the number of experiments. You cannot run more than 5 experiments at a time or implement over 16 combinations for multivariate testing (MVT). A premium version (Optimize 365) has fewer usage constraints, but it costs north of $150K per year.
Google Optimize has native integration with GA (of course), so you can review all the CRO data without switching apps. But Optimize doesn’t work well with Google Analytics alternatives, which many choose to use for privacy-friendly user tracking, higher data accuracy and GDPR compliance.
At the same time, many other conversion rate optimization (CRO) tools have emerged, often boasting better accuracy and more competitive features than Google Optimize.
Here are 5 alternative A/B testing apps worth considering.
Adobe Target
Adobe Target is an advanced personalization platform for optimising user and marketing experiences on digital properties. It uses machine learning algorithms to deliver dynamic content, personalised promotions and custom browsing experiences to visitors based on their behaviour and demographic data.
Adobe Target also provides A/B testing and multivariate testing (MVT) capabilities to help marketers test and refine their digital experiences.
Key features :
- Visual experience builder for A/B tests setup and replication
- Full factorial multivariate tests and multi-armed bandit testing
- Omnichannel personalisation across web properties
- Multiple audience segmentation and targeting options
- Personalised content, media and product recommendations
- Advanced customer intelligence (in conjunction with other Adobe products)
Pros
- Convenient A/B test design tool
- Acucate MVT and MAB results
- Powerful segmentation capabilities
- Access to extra behavioural analytics
- One-click personalisation activation
- Supports rules-based, location-based and contextual personalisation
- Robust omnichannel analytics in conjunction with other Adobe products
Cons
- Requires an Adobe Marketing Cloud subscription
- No free trial or freemium tier
- More complex product setup and configuration
- Steep learning curve for new users
Price : On-demand.
Adobe Target is sold as part of Adobe Marketing Cloud. Licence costs vary, based on selected subscriptions and the number of users, but are typically above $10K.
Google Optimize vs Adobe Target : The Verdict
Google Optimize comes with a free tier, unlike Adobe Target. It provides you with a basic builder for A/B and MVT tests, but none of the personalisation tools Adobe has. Because of ease-of-use and low price, other Google Optimize alternatives are better suited for small to medium-sized businesses, doing baseline CRO for funnel optimisation.
Adobe Target pulls you into the vast Adobe marketing ecosystem, offering omnipotent customer behaviour analytics, machine-learning-driven website optimisation, dynamic content recommendations, product personalisation and extensive reporting. The app is better suited for larger enterprises with a significant investment in digital marketing.
Matomo A/B Testing
Matomo A/B Testing is a CRO tool, integrated into Matomo. All Matomo Cloud users get instant access to it, while On-Premise (free) Matomo users can purchase A/B testing as a plugin.
With Matomo A/B Testing, you can create multiple variations of a web or mobile page and test them with different segments of their audience. Matomo also doesn’t have any strict experiment caps, unlike Google Optimize.
You can split-test multiple creative variants for on-site assets such as buttons, slogans, titles, call-to-actions, image positions and more. You can even benchmark the performance of two (or more !) completely different homepage designs, for instance.
With us, you can compliantly and ethically collect historical user data about any visitor, who’s entered any of the active tests — and monitor their entire customer journey. You can also leverage Matomo A/B Testing data as part of multi-touch attribution modelling to determine which channels bring the best leads and which assets drive them towards conversion.
Since Matomo A/B Testing is part of our analytics platform, it works well with other features such as goal tracking, heatmaps, user session recordings and more.
Key features
- Run experiments for web, mobile, email and digital campaigns
- Convenient A/B test design interface
- One-click experiment scheduling
- Integration with historic visitor profiles
- Near real-time conversion tracking
- Apply segmentation to Matomo reports
- Easy creative variation sharing via a URL
Pros
- High data accuracy with no reporting gaps
- Monitor the evolution of your success metrics for each variation
- Embed experiments across multiple digital channels
- Set a custom confidence threshold for winning variations
- No compromises on user privacy
- Free 21-day trial available (for Matomo Cloud) and free 30-day plugin trial (for Matomo On-Premise)
Cons
- No on-site personalisation tools available
- Configuration requires some coding experience
Price : Matomo A/B Testing is included in the monthly Cloud plan (starting at €19 per month). On-Premise users can buy this functionality as a plugin (starting at €199/year).
Google Optimize vs Matomo A/B Testing : The Verdict
Matomo offers the same types of A/B testing features as Google Optimize (and some extras !), but without any usage caps. Unlike Matomo, Google Optimize doesn’t support A/B tests for mobile apps. You can access some content testing features for Android Apps via Firebase, but this requires another subscription.
Matomo lets you run A/B experiments across the web and mobile properties, plus desktop apps, email campaigns and digital ads. Also, Matomo has higher conversion data accuracy, thanks to our privacy-focused method for collecting website analytics.
When using Matomo in most EU markets, you’re legally exempt from showing a cookie consent banner. Meaning you can collect richer insights for each experiment and make data-driven decisions. Nearly 40% of global consumers reject cookie consent banners. With most other tools, you won’t be getting the full picture of your traffic.
Optimizely
Optimizely is a conversion optimization platform that offers several competitive products for a separate subscription. These include a flexible content management system (CMS), a content marketing platform, a web A/B testing app, a mobile featuring testing product and two eCommerce-specific website management products.
The Web Experimentation app allows you to optimise every customer touchpoint by scheduling unlimited split or multi-variant tests and conversions across all your projects from the same app. Apart from websites, this subscription also supports experiments for single-page applications. But if you want more advanced mobile app testing features, you’ll have to purchase another product — Feature Experimentation.
Key features :
- Intuitive experiment design tool
- Cross-browser testing and experiment preview
- Multi-page funnel tests design
- Behavioural and geo-targeting
- Exit/bounce rate tracking
- Custom audience builder for experiments
- Comprehensive reporting
Pros
- Unlimited number of concurrent experiments
- Upload your audience data for test optimisation
- Dynamic content personalisation available on a higher tier
- Pre-made integrations with popular heatmap and analytics tools
- Supports segmentation by device, campaign type, traffic sources or referrer
Cons
- You need a separate subscription for mobile CRO
- Free trial not available, pricing on-demand
- Multiple licences and subscriptions may be required
- Doesn’t support A/B tests for emails
Price : Available on-demand.
Web Experimentation tool has three subscription tiers — Grow, Accelerate, and Scale with different features included.
Google Optimize vs Optimizely : The Verdict
Optimizely is a strong contender for Google Optimize alternative as it offers more advanced audience targeting and segmentation options. You can target users by IP address, cookies, traffic sources, device type, browser, language, location or a custom utm_campaign parameter.
Similar to Matomo A/B testing, Optimizely doesn’t limit the number of projects or concurrent experiments you can do. But you have to immediately sign an annual contract (no monthly plans are available). Pricing also varies based on the number of processed impressions (more experiments = a higher annual bill). An annual licence can cost $63,700 for 10 million impressions on average, according to an independent estimate.
Visual Website Optimizer (VWO)
VWO is another popular experimentation platform, supporting web, mobile and server-side A/B testing and personalisation campaigns.
Similar to others, VWO offers a drag-and-drop visual editor for creating campaign variants. You don’t need design or coding knowledge to create tests. Once you’re all set, the app will benchmark your experiment performance against expected conversion rates, report on differences in conversion rate and point towards the best-performing creative.
Similar to Optimizely, VWO also offers web/mobile app optimisation as a separate subscription. Apart from testing visual page elements, you can also run in-app experiments throughout the product stack to locate new revenue opportunities. For example, you can test in-app subscription flows, search algorithms or navigation flows to improve product UX.
Key features :
- Multivariate and multi-arm bandit tests
- Multi-step (funnel) split tests
- Collaborative experiment tracking dashboard
- Target users by different attributes (URL, device, geo-data)
- Personal library of creative elements
- Funnel analytics, session records, and heatmaps available
Pros
- Free starter plan is available (similar to Google Optimize)
- Simple tracking code installation and easy code editor
- Offers online reporting dashboards and report downloads
- Slice-and-dice reports by different audience dimensions
- No impact on website/app loading speed and performance
Cons
- Multivariate testing is only available on a higher-tier plan
- Annual contract required, despite monthly billing
- Mobile app A/B split tests require another licence
- Requires ongoing user training
Price : Free limited plan available.
Then from $356/month, billed annually.
Google Optimize vs VWO : The Verdict
The free plan on VWO is very similar to Google Optimize. You get access to A/B testing and split URL testing features for websites only. The visual editing tool is relatively simple — and you can use URL or device targeting.
Free VWO reports, however, lack the advertised depth in terms of behavioural or funnel-based reporting. In-depth insights are available only to premium users. Extra advertised features like heatmaps, form analytics and session recordings require yet another subscription. With Matomo Cloud, you get all three of these together with A/B testing.
ConvertFlow
ConvertFlow markets itself as a funnel optimisation app for eCommerce and SaaS companies. It meshes lead generation tools with some CRO workflows.
With ConvertFlow, you can effortlessly design opt-in forms, pop-ups, quizzes and even entire landing pages using pre-made web elements and a visual builder. Afterwards, you can put all of these assets to a “field test” via the ConvertFlow CRO platform. Select among pre-made templates or create custom variants for split or multivariate testing. You can customise tests based on URLs, cookie data and user geolocation among other factors.
Similar to Adobe Target, ConvertFlow also allows you to run tests targeted at specific customer segments in your CRM. The app has native integrations with HubSpot and Salesforce, so this feature is easy to enable. ConvertFlow also offers advanced targeting and segmentation options, based on user on-site behaviour, demographics data or known interests.
Key features :
- Create and test landing pages, surveys, quizzes, pop-ups, surveys and other lead-gen assets.
- All-in-one funnel builder for creating demand-generation campaigns
- Campaign personalisation, based on on-site activity
- Re-usable dynamic visitor segments for targeting
- Multi-step funnel design and customisation
- Embedded forms for split testing CTAs on existing pages
Pros
- Allows controlling the traffic split for each variant to get objective results
- Pre-made integration with Google Analytics and Google Tag Manager
- Conversion and funnel reports, available for each variant
- Access to a library with 300+ conversion campaign templates
- Apply progressive visitor profiling to dynamically adjust user experiences
Cons
- Each plan covers only $10K views. Each extra 10k costs another $20/mo
- Only one website allowed per account (except for Teams plan)
- Doesn’t support experiments in mobile app
- Not all CRO features are available on a Pro plan.
Price : Access to CRO features costs from $300/month on a Pro plan. Subscription costs also increase, based on the total number of monthly views.
Google Optimize vs CovertFlow : The Verdict
ConvertFlow is equally convenient to use in conjunction with Google Analytics as Google Optimize is. But the similarities end up here since ConvertFlow combines funnel design features with CRO tools.
With ConvertFlow, you can run more advanced experiments and apply more targeting criteria than with Google Optimize. You can observe user behaviour and conversion rates across multi-step CTA forms and page funnels, plus benefit from first-touch attribution reporting without switching apps.
Though CovertFlow has a free plan, it doesn’t include access to CRO features. Meaning it’s not a free alternative to Google Optimize.
Comparison of the Top 5 Google Optimize Alternatives
Feature Google Optimize Adobe Target Matomo A/B test Optimizely VWO ConvertFlow
Supported channels Web Web, mobile, social media, email Web, mobile, email, digital campaigns Websites & mobile apps Websites, web and mobile apps Websites and mobile apps A/B testing Easy GA integration Integrations with other web analytics apps Audience segmentation Basic Advanced Advanced Advanced Advanced Advanced Geo-targeting Behavioural targeting Basic Advanced Advanced Advanced Advanced Advanced Heatmaps
No extra cost with Matomo Cloud〰️
*via integrations〰️
*requires another subscriptionSession recordings
No extra cost with Matomo Cloud〰️
*requires another subscriptionMultivariate testing (MVT) Dynamic personalisation 〰️
*only on higher account tiers〰️
*only on the highest account tiersProduct recommendations 〰️
*requires another subscription〰️
*requires another subscription
Support Self-help desk on a free tier Email, live-chat, phone support Email, self-help guides and user forum Knowledge base, online tickets, user community Self-help guides, email, phone Knowledge base, email, and live chat support Price Freemium On-demand From €19 for Cloud subscription
From €199/year as plugin for On-PremiseOn-demand Freemium
From $365/moFrom $300/month Conclusion
Google Optimize has served marketers well for over five years. But as the company decided to move on — so should you.
Oher A/B testing tools like Matomo, Optimizely or VWO offer better funnel analytics and split testing capabilities without any usage caps. Also, tools like Adobe Target, Optimizely, and VWO offer advanced content personalisation, based on aggregate analytics. However, they also come with much higher subscription costs.
Matomo is a robust, compliant and cost-effective alternative to Google Optimize. Our tool allows you to schedule campaigns across all digital mediums (and even desktop apps !) without a