Recherche avancée

Sur d’autres sites (8135)

• why FFMPEG process is slow ?

  4 septembre 2020, par puneet18

  I tried to process 4gb video using ffmpeg on server with 1 CPU & 2GB RAM but the command is hanged for 5 mins then starts and process very slowly. Following is the console output :

  


  Command

  


  ffmpeg -i input.mp4 -filter_complex '[0:v]trim=823.2:867.3,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v0];[0:v]trim=1074.1:1101.4,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v1];[0:v]trim=1142.2:1198.9,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v2];[0:v]trim=1227.9:1320.0,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v3];[0:v]trim=1887.1:1990.8,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v4];[0:v]trim=2008.1:2091.3,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v5];[0:v]trim=3090.1:3105.1,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v6];[0:v]trim=3185.3:3222.2,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v7];[0:v]trim=3306.4:3336.5,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v8];[0:v]trim=3426.7:3465.7,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v9];[0:v]trim=3548.7:3586.5,setpts=PTS-STARTPTS[v10];[v0][v1][v2][v3][v4][v5][v6][v7][v8][v9][v10]concat=n=11:v=1[out]' -map '[out]' output.mp4


  


  Output

  


  ffmpeg version 3.4.8-0ubuntu0.2 Copyright (c) 2000-2020 the FFmpeg developers
  built with gcc 7 (Ubuntu 7.5.0-3ubuntu1~18.04)
  configuration: --prefix=/usr --extra-version=0ubuntu0.2 --toolchain=hardened --libdir=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu --incdir=/usr/include/x86_64-linux-gnu --enable-gpl --disable-stripping --enable-avresample --enable-avisynth --enable-gnutls --enable-ladspa --enable-libass --enable-libbluray --enable-libbs2b --enable-libcaca --enable-libcdio --enable-libflite --enable-libfontconfig --enable-libfreetype --enable-libfribidi --enable-libgme --enable-libgsm --enable-libmp3lame --enable-libmysofa --enable-libopenjpeg --enable-libopenmpt --enable-libopus --enable-libpulse --enable-librubberband --enable-librsvg --enable-libshine --enable-libsnappy --enable-libsoxr --enable-libspeex --enable-libssh --enable-libtheora --enable-libtwolame --enable-libvorbis --enable-libvpx --enable-libwavpack --enable-libwebp --enable-libx265 --enable-libxml2 --enable-libxvid --enable-libzmq --enable-libzvbi --enable-omx --enable-openal --enable-opengl --enable-sdl2 --enable-libdc1394 --enable-libdrm --enable-libiec61883 --enable-chromaprint --enable-frei0r --enable-libopencv --enable-libx264 --enable-shared
  libavutil      55. 78.100 / 55. 78.100
  libavcodec     57.107.100 / 57.107.100
  libavformat    57. 83.100 / 57. 83.100
  libavdevice    57. 10.100 / 57. 10.100
  libavfilter     6.107.100 /  6.107.100
  libavresample   3.  7.  0 /  3.  7.  0
  libswscale      4.  8.100 /  4.  8.100
  libswresample   2.  9.100 /  2.  9.100
  libpostproc    54.  7.100 / 54.  7.100
Input #0, mov,mp4,m4a,3gp,3g2,mj2, from '/tmp/down-net_http20200902-1614-1x7tk8f.mp4':
  Metadata:
    major_brand     : qt  
    minor_version   : 0
    compatible_brands: qt  
    creation_time   : 2020-08-28T14:02:14.000000Z
  Duration: 01:00:18.73, start: 0.000000, bitrate: 8895 kb/s
    Stream #0:0(und): Video: h264 (Main) (avc1 / 0x31637661), yuv420p(tv, bt709, progressive), 1280x720 [SAR 1:1 DAR 16:9], 8871 kb/s, 15 fps, 15 tbr, 6k tbn, 12k tbc (default)
    Metadata:
      creation_time   : 2020-08-28T14:02:14.000000Z
      handler_name    : Core Media Video
Stream mapping:
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  Stream #0:0 (h264) -> trim
  concat -> Stream #0:0 (libx264)
Press [q] to stop, [?] for help
[libx264 @ 0x563bd0d2c520] using SAR=1/1
[libx264 @ 0x563bd0d2c520] using cpu capabilities: MMX2 SSE2Fast SSSE3 SSE4.2 AVX FMA3 BMI2 AVX2
[libx264 @ 0x563bd0d2c520] profile High, level 3.1
[libx264 @ 0x563bd0d2c520] 264 - core 152 r2854 e9a5903 - H.264/MPEG-4 AVC codec - Copyleft 2003-2017 - http://www.videolan.org/x264.html - options: cabac=1 ref=3 deblock=1:0:0 analyse=0x3:0x113 me=hex subme=7 psy=1 psy_rd=1.00:0.00 mixed_ref=1 me_range=16 chroma_me=1 trellis=1 8x8dct=1 cqm=0 deadzone=21,11 fast_pskip=1 chroma_qp_offset=-2 threads=1 lookahead_threads=1 sliced_threads=0 nr=0 decimate=1 interlaced=0 bluray_compat=0 constrained_intra=0 bframes=3 b_pyramid=2 b_adapt=1 b_bias=0 direct=1 weightb=1 open_gop=0 weightp=2 keyint=250 keyint_min=15 scenecut=40 intra_refresh=0 rc_lookahead=40 rc=crf mbtree=1 crf=23.0 qcomp=0.60 qpmin=0 qpmax=69 qpstep=4 ip_ratio=1.40 aq=1:1.00
Output #0, mp4, to '/opt/app/tmp/file_1599089716.mp4':
  Metadata:
    major_brand     : qt  
    minor_version   : 0
    compatible_brands: qt  
    encoder         : Lavf57.83.100
    Stream #0:0: Video: h264 (libx264) (avc1 / 0x31637661), yuv420p, 1280x720 [SAR 1:1 DAR 16:9], q=-1--1, 15 fps, 15360 tbn, 15 tbc (default)
    Metadata:
      encoder         : Lavc57.107.100 libx264
    Side data:
      cpb: bitrate max/min/avg: 0/0/0 buffer size: 0 vbv_delay: -1
frame=    0 fps=0.0 q=0.0 size=       0kB time=00:00:00.00 bitrate=N/A speed=   0x 




  


  How can I improve the speed ?

  


  ==================

  


  I tried following command and getting an error :

  


  Command

  


  ffmpeg -ss 823.2 -to 867.3 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 1074.1 -to 1101.4 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 1142.2 -to 1198.9 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 1227.9 -to 1320.0 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 1887.1 -to 1990.8 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 2008.1 -to 2091.3 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 3090.1 -to 3105.1 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 3185.3 -to 3222.2 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 3306.4 -to 3336.5 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 3426.7 -to 3465.7 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -ss 3548.7 -to 3586.5 -i /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4  -filter_complex '[0:v][1:v][2:v][3:v][4:v][5:v][6:v][7:v][8:v][9:v][10:v]concat=n=11:v=1:a=0[v]' -map '[v]' /opt/app/tmp/file_1599127170.mp4


  


  Error

  


  Option to (record or transcode stop time) cannot be applied to input url /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4 -- you are trying to apply an input option to an output file or vice versa. Move this option before the file it belongs to.
Error parsing options for input file /opt/app/tmp/down-net_http20200903-4776-1o4wkhk.mp4.
Error opening input files: Invalid argument


  


• Is Google Analytics Accurate ? 6 Important Caveats

  8 novembre 2022, par Erin

  It’s no secret that accurate website analytics is crucial for growing your online business — and Google Analytics is often the go-to source for insights. 

  But is Google Analytics data accurate ? Can you fully trust the provided numbers ? Here’s a detailed explainer.

  How Accurate is Google Analytics ? A Data-Backed Answer 

  When properly configured, Google Analytics (Universal Analytics and Google Analytics 4) is moderately accurate for global traffic collection. That said : Google Analytics doesn’t accurately report European traffic. 

  According to GDPR provisions, sites using GA products must display a cookie consent banner. This consent is required to collect third-party cookies — a tracking mechanism for identifying users across web properties.

  Google Analytics (GA) cannot process data about the user’s visit if they rejected cookies. In such cases, your analytics reports will be incomplete.

  Cookie rejection refers to visitors declining or blocking cookies from ever being collected by a specific website (or within their browser). It immediately affects the accuracy of all metrics in Google Analytics.

  Google Analytics is not accurate in locations where cookie consent to tracking is legally required. Most consumers don’t like disruptive cookie banners or harbour concerns about their privacy — and chose to reject tracking. 

  This leaves businesses with incomplete data, which, in turn, results in : 

  • Lower traffic counts as you’re not collecting 100% of the visitor data. 
  • Loss of website optimisation capabilities. You can’t make data-backed decisions due to inconsistent reporting

  For the above reasons, many companies now consider cookieless website tracking apps that don’t require consent screen displays. 

  Why is Google Analytics Not Accurate ? 6 Causes and Solutions 

  A high rejection rate of cookie banners is the main reason for inaccurate Google Analytics reporting. In addition, your account settings can also hinder Google Analytics’ accuracy.

  If your analytics data looks wonky, check for these six Google Analytics accuracy problems. 

  You Need to Secure Consent to Cookies Collection 

  To be GDPR-compliant, you must display a cookie consent screen to all European users. Likewise, other jurisdictions and industries require similar measures for user data collection. 

  This is a nuisance for many businesses since cookie rejection undermines their remarketing capabilities. Hence, some try to maximise cookie acceptance rates with dark patterns. For example : hide the option to decline tracking or make the texts too small. 

  

  Sadly, not everyone’s treating users with respect. A joint study by German and American researchers found that only 11% of US websites (from a sample of 5,000+) use GDPR-compliant cookie banners.

  As a result, many users aren’t aware of the background data collection to which they have (or have not) given consent. Another analysis of 200,000 cookies discovered that 70% of third-party marketing cookies transfer user data outside of the EU — a practice in breach of GDPR.

  Naturally, data regulators and activities are after this issue. In April 2022, Google was pressured to introduce a ‘reject all’ cookies button to all of its products (a €150 million compliance fine likely helped with that). Whereas, noyb has lodged over 220 complaints against individual websites with deceptive cookie consent banners.

  The takeaway ? Messing up with the cookie consent mechanism can get you in legal trouble. Don’t use sneaky banners as there are better ways to collect website traffic statistics. 

  Solution : Try Matomo GDPR-Friendly Analytics 

  Fill in the gaps in your traffic analytics with Matomo – a fully GDPR-compliant product that doesn’t rely on third-party cookies for tracking web visitors. Because of how it is designed, the French data protection authority (CNIL) confirmed that Matomo can be used to collect data without tracking consent.

  With Matomo, you can track website users without asking for cookie consent. And when you do, we supply you with a compact, compliant, non-disruptive cookie banner design. 

  Your Google Tag Isn’t Embedded Correctly 

  Google Tag (gtag.js) is a web tracking script that sends data to your Google Analytics, Google Ads and Google Marketing Platform.

  A corrupted gtag.js installation can create two accuracy issues : 

  • Duplicate page tracking 
  • Missing script installation 

  Is there a way to tell if you’re affected ?

  Yes. You may have duplicate scripts installed if you have a very low bounce rate on most website pages (below 15% – 20%). The above can happen if you’re using a WordPress GA plugin and additionally embed gtag.js straight in your website code. 

  A tell-tale sign of a missing script on some pages is low/no traffic stats. Google alerts you about this with a banner : 

  

  Solution : Use Available Troubleshooting Tools 

  Use Google Analytics Debugger extension to analyse pages with low bounce rates. Use the search bar to locate duplicate code-tracking elements. 

  Alternatively, you can use Google Tag Assistant for diagnosing snippet install and troubleshooting issues on individual pages. 

  If the above didn’t work, re-install your analytics script. 

  Machine Learning and Blended Data Are Applied

  Google Analytics 4 (GA4) relies a lot on machine learning and algorithmic predictions.

  By applying Google’s advanced machine learning models, the new Analytics can automatically alert you to significant trends in your data. [...] For example, it calculates churn probability so you can more efficiently invest in retaining customers.

  Vidhya Srinivasan, VP of Measurement, Analytics and Buying Platforms at Google

  On the surface, the above sounds exciting. In practice, Google’s application of predictive algorithms means you’re not seeing actual data. 

  To offer a variation of cookieless tracking, Google algorithms close the gaps in reporting by creating models (i.e., data-backed predictions) instead of reporting on actual user behaviours. Therefore, your GA4 numbers may not be accurate.

  For bigger web properties (think websites with 1+ million users), Google also relies on data sampling — a practice of extrapolating data analytics, based on a data subset, rather than the entire dataset. Once again, this can lead to inconsistencies in reporting with some numbers (e.g., average conversion rates) being inflated or downplayed. 

  Solution : Try an Alternative Website Analytics App 

  Unlike GA4, Matomo reports consist of 100% unsampled data. All the aggregated reporting you see is based on real user data (not guesstimation). 

  Moreover, you can migrate from Universal Analytics (UA) to Matomo without losing access to your historical records. GA4 doesn’t yet have any backward compatibility.

  Spam and Bot Traffic Isn’t Filtered Out 

  Surprise ! 42% of all Internet traffic is generated by bots, of which 27.7% are bad ones.

  Good bots (aka crawlers) do essential web “housekeeping” tasks like indexing web pages. Bad bots distribute malware, spam contact forms, hack user accounts and do other nasty stuff. 

  A lot of such spam bots are designed specifically for web analytics apps. The goal ? Flood your dashboard with bogus data in hopes of getting some return action from your side. 

  Types of Google Analytics Spam :

  • Referral spam. Spambots hijack the referrer, displayed in your GA referral traffic report to indicate a page visit from some random website (which didn’t actually occur). 
  • Event spam. Bots generate fake events with free language entries enticing you to visit their website. 
  • Ghost traffic spam. Malicious parties can also inject fake pageviews, containing URLs that they want you to click. 

  Obviously, such spammy entities distort the real website analytics numbers. 

  Solution : Set Up Bot/Spam Filters 

  Google Analytics 4 has automatic filtering of bot traffic enabled for all tracked Web and App properties. 

  But if you’re using Universal Analytics, you’ll have to manually configure spam filtering. First, create a new view and then set up a custom filter. Program it to exclude :

  • Filter Field : Request URI
  • Filter Pattern : Bot traffic URL

  Once you’ve configured everything, validate the results using Verify this filter feature. Then repeat the process for other fishy URLs, hostnames and IP addresses. 

  You Don’t Filter Internal Traffic 

  Your team(s) spend a lot of time on your website — and their sporadic behaviours can impair your traffic counts and other website metrics.

  To keep your data “employee-free”, exclude traffic from : 

  • Your corporate IPs addresses 
  • Known personal IPs of employees (for remote workers) 

  If you also have a separate stage version of your website, you should also filter out all traffic coming from it. Your developers, contractors and marketing people spend a lot of time fiddling with your website. This can cause a big discrepancy in average time on page and engagement rates. 

  Solution : Set Internal Traffic Filters 

  Google provides instructions for excluding internal traffic from your reports using IPv4/IPv6 address filters. 

  

  Session Timeouts After 30 Minutes 

  After 30 minutes of inactivity, Google Analytics tracking sessions start over. Inactivity means no recorded interaction hits during this time. 

  Session timeouts can be a problem for some websites as users often pin a tab to check it back later. Because of this, you can count the same user twice or more — and this leads to skewed reporting. 

  Solution : Programme Custom Timeout Sessions

  You can codify custom cookie timeout sessions with the following code snippets : 

  • _setSessionCookieTimeout. Set a custom new session cookie timeout in milliseconds.
  • _setVisitorCookieTimeout. Sets a custom Google Analytics visitor cookie expiration time frame in milliseconds.

  Final Thoughts 

  Thanks to its scale and longevity, Google Analytics has some strong sides, but its data accuracy isn’t 100% perfect.

  The inability to capture analytics data from users who don’t consent to cookie tracking and data sampling applied to bigger web properties may be a deal-breaker for your business. 

  If that’s the case, try Matomo — a GDPR-compliant, accurate web analytics solution. Start your 21-day free trial now. No credit card required.

  21 day free trial. No credit card required.

  Your email address
  

  Your website address
  

  Your Analytics subdomain will be .matomo.cloud (change)

  Choose your analytics subdomain
  

  .matomo.cloud

  I hereby accept the terms and conditions and the data processing agreement (DPA)

  
  Your information will be used to create an account on our cloud service. For more information please consult our privacy policy.
  
  

  » Start improving your websites now

  

• Google Optimize vs Matomo A/B Testing : Everything You Need to Know

  17 mars 2023, par Erin — Analytics Tips

  Google 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 Matomo
  Audience 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-Premise
  Heatmaps		Included with Matomo Cloud
  Session recordings		Included with Matomo Cloud
  GDPR 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-Premise

  Final 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.