Grid℠ for Conversion Rate Optimization | Summer 2016

Instapage is a CRO tool used to create landing pages with an emphasis on lead generation and encouraging clickthroughs. The product provides customizable landing page templates, mobile responsive designs, and pixel tracking.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Instapage moved from a High Performer to a Leader.
• Instapage received 45 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.
• Market presence rose 20 points.

Significant Numbers

Based on Instapage reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 59% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 4 months.
• The majority of Instapage reviewers work at small businesses (82% at companies with 50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Instapage's:

• Ease of use, which was Instapage’s most frequently endorsed feature by reviewers. Users appreciated that Instapage’s WYSIWYG and drag-and-drop interface makes it simple for non-designers to create attractive landing pages with little effort. Reviewers noted that the product’s simplicity does not detract from the robustness of its functionality. Instapage received a rating of 97% satisfaction for ease of use, the highest rating in the category for this metric (avg. 84%).
• Landing pages. Users mentioned that creating landing pages is simple using Instapage’s aesthetically pleasing templates. Reviewers rated Instapage’s landing page feature at 97% satisfaction (avg. 87%). This is tied for the highest rating for this metric in the category.
• Quality of support. Reviewers found Instapage’s customer support team responsive and appreciated being able to contact support via live chat, phone, and email. Instapage’s quality of support received a rating of 96% satisfaction (avg. 89%).

Reviewers often switched to Instapage from another product, because:

• Users appreciated Instapage’s ease of use and drag-and-drop functionality. They noted that Instapage simplifies the process of creating attractive landing pages compared to the product they previously used.

Reviewers did not come to a consensus on which aspects of Instapage need improvement, but some examples mentioned by reviewers were limitations to the product’s admin and user management, as well as some issues with customizing form and landing page layouts.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward Instapage's:

• Cost. Some users found Instapage an affordable solution for landing page creation, while others hoped for cheaper pricing options.
• Integrations. While a handful of reviewers appreciated Instapage’s integrations with third-party software, others experienced glitches and problems with some integrations. Some users expressed that they would like to see Instapage integrate with a wider variety of products. That being said, Instapage received a 91% satisfaction rating for API/integrations (avg. 84%).
• Mobile optimization. According to users, Instapage enables users to easily create mobile-responsive landing pages. However, some found it difficult to move elements and wanted to be able to design landing pages for mobile first, rather than having to base mobile pages off of previously created desktop-oriented pages. Despite some users’ concerns, Instapage received a 92% satisfaction rating for mobile optimization (avg. 83%).

Instapage was rated very favorably, receiving above-average scores for all satisfaction ratings and most feature metrics, as well as the highest Satisfaction score in the Conversion Rate Optimization report (normalized for the category). The product received the highest ratings in the Conversion Rate Optimization category for ease of setup (97% vs. avg. 84%), ease of use (97% vs. avg. 84%), ease of admin (97% vs. 86%), landing pages (97% vs. avg. 87%), and WYSIWYG editor (97% vs. avg. 82%). Users had few dislikes to share about Instapage, but some did express dissatisfaction with the product’s price and found room for improvement with the product’s integrations with third-party software. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Instapage at a rate of 97%.

Visual Website Optimizer (VWO) is a comprehensive conversion rate optimization solution, offering features such as A/B, split URL and multivariate testing, heat maps, and a landing page analyzer.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Visual Website Optimizer moved from a High Performer to a Leader.
• Visual Website Optimizer received 53 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.
• Satisfaction increased 29 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).
• Market presence increased 15 points.

Significant Numbers

Based on Visual Website Optimizer reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 66% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 4 months.
• The majority of VWO reviewers work at small businesses (58% at companies with 50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Visual Website Optimizer's:

• A/B Testing. This feature is one of the most mentioned in users’ reviews. Many noted that the split testing functionality offers a large variety of testing customizations. Reviewers also felt that the data and results from A/B testing are robust.
• Ease of use. Users appreciated VWO’s straightforward, easy-to-use WYSIWYG interface. Many called the product user friendly and mentioned that technical knowledge is not required.

Reviewers often switched to Visual Website Optimizer from another product, because:

• Users found VWO offers a wider variety of versatile testing options than their previous CRO solution.

Reviewers disliked Visual Website Optimizer's:

• Cost. Users were dissatisfied with the price associated with Visual Website Optimizer. Some mentioned having to pay for a higher subscription to get all of the features they need. A handful of reviewers felt that there is too big of a discrepancy in pricing between the standard and enterprise plans offered by Visual Website Optimizer. Users expressed a desire for a mid-level package that would incorporate some of the enterprise features at a lower price point.
• Speed. Some reviewers said Visual Website Optimizer can be slow to load, while others noted a flicker on their site after using the solution.
• Bugs and glitches. Users mentioned a variety of glitches experienced while using VWO, specifically with the page editor.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward Visual Website Optimizer's:

• Quality of support. Users disagreed on VWO’s support team, with some finding the team slow to respond to inquiries, while others appreciated the support staff and liked the product’s knowledge base and video offerings. Visual Website Optimizer was rated at 90% satisfaction for quality of support, only 1% above the category average (avg. 89%).

Visual Website Optimizer received mixed satisfaction ratings and feature metrics, with A/B testing being the product’s highest-rated feature. The product received the highest number of reviews in the Conversion Rate Optimization report. Overall, users were satisfied with Virtual Web Optimizer’s A/B testing and simple-to-use interface, but were dissatisfied with the product’s speed and occasional bugginess. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Visual Website Optimizer at a rate of 85%.

Optimizely is an A/B and multivariate testing platform for users to enhance their websites and mobile apps.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Optimizely received 11 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.
• Satisfaction decreased 8 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on Optimizely reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 56% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 5 months.
• Mid-market business users represent the largest customer segment served by Optimizely (49% at companies with 51-1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Optimizely's:

• A/B testing. Users found it simple to create A/B tests and see results with Optimizely. Users found it easy to set up A/B tests without coding or much technical knowledge. The product received the second-highest rating in the Conversion Rate Optimization category for this feature (97% vs. avg. 91%). This is also Optimizely’s highest-rated feature.
• Optiverse. A handful of reviewers lauded Optimizely’s Optiverse—a user forum and community support page—as a strong resource for anyone looking to learn about conversion rate optimization and improve their testing campaigns.

Reviewers disliked Optimizely's:

• Quality of support. Some reviewers mentioned that Optimizely's customer service agents were quick to direct them to educational documents rather than address account issues individually. Optimizely received an 84% satisfaction rating for quality of support (avg. 89%).
• Price. Some reviewers felt that Optimizely’s tiered pricing system does not fit the needs of both their business and budget. Users warned against going over monthly visitor limits, as prices increase significantly between tiers.
• Load times. A handful of reviewers felt that Optimizely slows loading time on their websites.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward Optimizely's:

• Ease of use. Many reviewers found Optimizely’s basic functions simple to use. However, some reviewers warned that complex changes may require technical knowledge or support from developers as a testing program evolves. Users rated Optimizely's ease of use at 86% satisfaction, just above the category average of 84%.

Product News

Recently, Optimizely announced:

• In October 2015, Optimizely received $58M in Series C funding. This brought Optimizely’s funding to a total of $146.2M in six rounds.
• In March 2016, Optimizely announced that it planned to lay off 40 employees and reduce its workforce by 10%.
• Optimizely was nominated for a Best Advocate Marketing Award (BAMMIE) for Best Use of Advocates at Events.

Optimizely was rated at average or above average for all variation testing metrics, but fell below category averages for all other feature metrics. It received satisfaction ratings close to category averages. A/B testing was its most frequently endorsed feature, but users disagreed on the ease of conducting more complicated testing. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Optimizely at a rate of 88%.

KISSmetrics provides both digital analytics and conversion rate optimization tools, geared toward directing visitors to targeted content. KISSmetrics also offers out-of-the-box reporting for internally created A/B tests (typically designed by programmers) or through integrations with Optimizely and Visual Website Optimizer.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• KISSmetrics received 7 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.
• Satisfaction decreased 12 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on KISSmetrics reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 60% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 8 months.
• The majority of KISSmetrics users work for small businesses (54% at companies with 50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked KISSmetrics’:

• Data funneling, which was one of the most frequently referenced features of KISSmetrics in user reviews. Users reported that KISSmetrics provides large amounts of data; the funneling function helps to break down that data and allow users to easily track visitor behavior and flow.
• Data quality. Users appreciated the amount of data KISSmetrics collects and noted that the product provides a variety of reports to visualize that data in different ways.

Reviewers disliked KISSmetrics':

• Usability. Reviewers mentioned that there is a steep learning curve associated with the platform and that it can be difficult to navigate. KISSmetrics received a 76% satisfaction rating for ease of use (avg. 84%).
• Quality of support. Some users felt that KISSmetrics’ support could be more responsive, expressing frustration with long response times or lack of response all together by the support team. This sentiment is reflected in an 80% satisfaction rating for quality of support (avg. 89%).

Product News

Recently, KISSmetrics announced:

• Changes to its People Search functionality, aimed toward improving search queries conducted with the feature.

KISSmetrics received below-average ratings for all satisfaction ratings and most feature metrics. While some reviewers noted that KISSmetrics’ reporting can initially be difficult to set up and learn, there is a consensus that the data provided by KISSmetrics is robust. The data funneling feature was the most widely endorsed feature of the product. Reviewers recommend taking the time to properly set up funnels and events to get the most value out of the data KISSmetrics provides. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend KISSmetrics at a rate of 81%.

Monetate is an A/B testing tool that displays changes overtop of an existing website.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Satisfaction decreased 19 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on Monetate reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 84% user adoption on average.
• Only 8% of Monetate’s reviews came from employees of small-businesses (50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Monetate's:

• A/B Testing. Reviewers gave Monetate’s A/B testing function a 94% satisfaction rating (avg. 91%). Users said they take Monetate beyond testing by segmenting a site’s audience and deploying targeted content. Testing and personalization campaigns can be scheduled, initiated, and paused at will.
• WYSIWYG editor. Users found the WYSIWYG editor both easy to use and powerful, and were confident it could handle the changes they wanted to create. Reviewers rated Monetate’s WYSIWYG editor at 86% satisfaction, 4% higher than the category average.
• Support. Reviewers noted that Monetate's support team is helpful and responsive. According to some users, Monetate provides dedicated response teams to assist with campaign support. This feature received a 94% satisfaction rating compared to the category average of 89%.

Reviewers disliked Monetate's:

• Load lag. Because Monetate alters the site after loading, a number of reviewers reported experiencing a load lag that they described as a flicker while the campaign materializes.
• User interface. Reviewers thought the interface that displays campaigns and actions could be more intuitive and easier to sort or scan. However, more recent reviews indicate that Monetate is open to users’ suggestions and has been progressively implementing updates to the interface.
• Reporting. Reviewers requested more robust reporting features such as viewing in-progress testing results and a better drill-down into the data.

Overall, Monetate was reviewed favorably and received above-average ratings for most satisfaction ratings and feature metrics. While reviewers strongly recommended a basic understanding of HTML and CSS tags, they said a non-technical user would be able to use Monetate without too much trouble. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Monetate at a rate of 91%.

Leadpages is a landing page generator that allows users to build conversion optimized and mobile-responsive landing pages.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Leadpages received 9 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.
• Satisfaction decreased 18 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on Leadpages reviewer feedback:

• The vast majority of Leadpages’ reviewers work for small businesses (87% at companies with 50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Leadpages':

• Landing pages. Users appreciated Leadpages’ professional, easy-to-create landing pages. Some noted that the templates offered are customizable and professional looking, while others mentioned that Leadpages lets users sort templates by conversion rate. Leadpages’ received a rating of 97% satisfaction for landing pages, tied for the highest rating in the category for that metric (avg. 87%).
• Ease of use, which received a 92% satisfaction rating (avg. 84%). According to users, technical and design experience are not necessary to create landing pages with Leadpages.
• Mobile optimization. Users appreciated the product’s mobile-responsive nature. Leadpages received a 98% satisfaction rating for mobile optimization, the highest rating in the category for this metric (avg. 83%).

Reviewers disliked Leadpages':

• Lack of template customizability. Reviewers most frequently mentioned dissatisfaction with the level of advanced customizability available for landing pages. Leadpages’ landing page templates are not customizable enough for users with HTML knowledge or those who wish to make design changes to the templates outside of the standard customizations offered by the product.

Product News

Recently, Leadpages announced:

• In December 2015, Leadpages released a new product, called Center, for a group of early adopters. Center is a marketing automation command center, allowing the tracking and segmenting of leads. The product is projected for wide release in August 2016.

Leadpages was rated favorably and received above-average ratings for the majority of satisfaction ratings and feature metrics. Users called it a robust tool for quickly and easily creating landing pages that convert. However, some did wish that the templates could be even more customizable for more technically proficient users. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Leadpages at a rate of 92%.

Unbounce is a landing page builder used to quickly create new landing pages and optimize conversions that come through those pages. Once created from a library of templates or one’s custom template, users can A/B test the page to discover which elements lead to conversion.

Significant Numbers

Based on Unbounce reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 65% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 4 months.
• The majority of Unbounce reviewers work for small businesses (61% at companies with 50 or fewer employees). Unbounce did not receive any reviews from users at enterprise-level businesses (more than 1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Unbounce's:

• Ease of use, which received a 90% satisfaction rating (avg. 84%). Users said that Unbounce has a simple, intuitive, user-friendly WYSIWYG interface. Users loved that instead of landing page requests entering developers’ backlog of requests, they could be fulfilled quickly by non-technical staff in the marketing or lead-gen department.
• A/B Testing. Reviewers lauded Unbounce's A/B testing features, indicating that they are simple and flexible to implement. This is reflected in Unbounce’s 95% satisfaction rating for A/B testing (avg. 91%).

Reviewers disliked Unbounce's:

• Reporting. A handful of users found Unbounce’s reporting functionality lacking, saying that they have to rely on outside analytics tools and often see discrepancies with the results Unbounce provides. Unbounce received a rating of 73% satisfaction for reports and dashboards (avg. 84%). The product received below-average ratings for all reporting metrics.
• Mobile optimization. Users rated Unbounce’s mobile optimization features at 74% satisfaction (avg. 83%). A few reviewers noted that mobile web pages require additional redirects.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward Unbounce's:

• Integrations. A number of users appreciated Unbounce’s integrations with third-party software including email marketing tools and analytics tools. However, some reviewers wished the product integrated with a larger selection of third-party tools. Unbounce’s API/Integrations received an 83% satisfaction rating (avg. 84%).

Unbounce was rated above average for most satisfaction ratings and feature metrics. Users appreciated that Unbounce provides straightforward editing tools for landing pages, but the product fell short when it came to reporting. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Unbounce at a rate of 91%.

Marketizator is an A/B testing platform with personalization features. The product includes a WYSIWYG editor, and campaigns can be scheduled based on time of day or using the product's segmentation capabilities.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Satisfaction decreased 16 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on Marketizator reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 63% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 5 months.
• The majority of Marketizator reviewers work for small businesses (68% at companies with 50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Marketizator's:

• Quality of support. A number of reviewers mentioned that Marketizator's support team is attentive and responsive. Marketizator received a 95% satisfaction rating for quality of support (avg. 89%).
• Comprehensiveness. A number of users noted that Marketizator is more than a straightforward A/B testing tool—it also allows for personalization and the gathering of qualitative data.

Reviewers disliked Marketizator's:

• User interface. A handful of reviewers noted that Marketizator’s user interface could be streamlined. Additionally, users mentioned that the interface is not as intuitive as they would like.
• Mobile optimization, which is rated at 79% satisfaction, 4% lower than the category average of 83%.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward Marketizator's:

• Ease of use. Many reviewers commented on how easy it is to use Marketizator, and how it provides a straightforward user experience with no need for technical experience. However, the product received an 85% satisfaction rating for ease of use (avg. 84%).

Product News

Recently, Marketizator announced:

• In April 2016, Marketizator received $1.14M in private equity funding.

Marketizator was rated above average for all satisfaction ratings and all feature metrics, with the exception of mobile optimization (79% vs. avg. 83%). Users were satisfied, on the whole, with Marketizator and its ability to help with campaign results. Reviewers agreed that Marketizator provides high-quality customer service and an easy-to-use product. Users mentioned that Marketizator offers a free product in addition to their paid offerings; some recommended trying their free version to evaluate whether the product is an appropriate fit. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Marketizator at a rate of 95%.

Convert Experiments is an A/B testing tool with multivariate testing functionality, with WYSIWYG, HTML, and style sheet testing editors.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Convert Experiments debuted as a High Performer.
• Convert Experiments received 10 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.

Significant Numbers

Based on Convert Experiments reviewer feedback:

• The majority of Convert Experiments reviewers work at small businesses (88% at companies with 50 or fewer employees). No reviews came from employees of enterprise-level businesses (more than 1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Convert Experiments':

• Team. Convert Experiments’ support team is responsive, users said, noting that the live chat feature is especially useful. Users also appreciated the additional consulting services offered by the Convert team. Convert Experiments received a 98% satisfaction rating for quality of support (avg. 89%).
• Price. Users appreciated Convert Experiments’ competitive price point and called the product an affordable split testing solution.

Reviewers often switched to Convert Experiments from another product, because:

• Users appreciated Convert Experiments’ lower and more-flexible pricing, as well as its responsive support team.

Reviewers disliked Convert Experiments':

• Documentation. A handful of users would have liked to see a larger, better-organized library of support documentation from Convert Experiments.
• Bugs. Some reviewers mentioned experiencing bugs while using different aspects of the Convert Experiments platform.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward Convert Experiments':

• User interface. Users disagreed on Convert Experiments’ user interface. Some found the interface unintuitive to use and specifically experienced issues with the product’s WYSIWYG editor. However, others found the interface straightforward to use, especially for those using the product’s JavaScript and CSS editors. Convert Experiments received an 86% satisfaction rating for ease of use, just above the category average of 84%.

Product News

Recently, Convert Experiments announced:

• In March 2016, Convert Experiments moved the product’s entire infrastructure from the United States to Frankfurt, Germany. The move was made in response to a ruling related to the EU-US Privacy Shield. The vendor explained that Germany offers tight privacy regulations.

Convert Experiments received above-average ratings for all satisfaction ratings and feature metrics, for which it received enough responses. The product received the lowest number of reviews in the Conversion Rate Optimization report. Users were split on the ease of navigation for the user interface, but agreed that the Convert team is a valuable resource. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Convert Experiments at a rate of 94%.

Google Analytics 360, formerly Google Analytics Premium, is an enterprise-level conversion rate optimization platform with advanced features from the free version of the product, including increased data volume limits, expanded reporting, and dedicated support.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Google Analytics 360 debuted as a Contender.
• Google Analytics 360 received 15 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.

Significant Numbers

Based on Google Analytics 360 reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 68% user adoption on average.
• The majority of Google Analytics 360 reviewers work at enterprise-level businesses (62% at companies with more than 1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Google Analytics 360's:

• Comprehensive data. Users appreciated that Google Analytics 360 provides a wide variety of data on visitors, which allows users to learn more about their visitors and optimize content based on visitors’ actions. With Google Analytics 360, reviewers explained, all visitor analytics and testing data is aggregated in one place.
• Reports, which reviewers said are easy to read and export. Google Analytics 360 received a 90% satisfaction rating for reports and dashboards (avg. 84%).

Reviewers disliked Google Analytics 360's:

• Learning curve. Reviewers cited a steep learning curve with Google Analytics 360, noting that it can be difficult to learn the nuances of the product’s navigation due to an overabundance of features and options. Google Analytics 360 received a 79% satisfaction rating for ease of use (avg. 84%).
• Event tagging. A few users mentioned Google Analytics 360’s event tagging feature is complicated and can make it difficult to leverage visitor data.

Product News

Recently, Google Analytics 360 announced:

• In March 2016, Google announced a rebranding of its enterprise services and the release of the Analytics 360 Suite.
• As part of the Analytics 360 Suite, Google has developed a new optimization product called Optimization 360, currently in beta.

Google Analytics 360 was rated below average for most satisfaction ratings and feature metrics. Users appreciated the product’s comprehensiveness when it comes to gathering user data, but found that its overabundance of features doesn’t necessarily make it a more valuable tool for conversion rate optimization. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Google Analytics 360 at a rate of 89%.

ion interactive is a platform that helps marketers create, test, and measure dynamic content marketing experiences without the need for developers. The product features A/B/n testing functionality and provides automatic and manual optimization options.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• ion interactive debuted as a Niche vendor.
• ion interactive received 34 new Conversion Rate Optimization reviews.

Significant Numbers

Based on ion interactive reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 70% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 6 months.
• The majority of ion interactive reviewers work at mid-market businesses (58% at companies with 51-1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked ion interactive's:

• Landing pages. Users said that the solution offers attractive templates and both WYSIWYG and code-based interfaces for creating and editing landing pages.
• Quality of support. According to reviewers, ion interactive’s customer support team is responsive and helpful. The product received a 92% satisfaction rating for quality of support (avg. 89%).

Reviewers disliked ion interactive's:

• Reporting, which a handful of reviewers called limited. Some mentioned using third-party analytics and reporting tools in conjunction with ion interactive. The product received a rating of 74% satisfaction for reports and dashboards (avg. 84%).
• Bugs. Users reported a variety of bugs and glitches experienced while using the ion interactive platform.

Reviewers had mixed reactions toward ion interactive's:

• Ease of use. User opinion differed on whether or not ion interactive is user friendly. Some users found the interface simple and intuitive to use, while others felt that the product is confusing and has a steep learning curve. Ultimately, it received a 79% satisfaction rating for ease of use (avg. 84%).

Product News

Recently, ion interactive announced:

• In March 2016, ion interactive launched an app on Oracle Marketing AppCloud.

ion interactive was rated near or below average for most satisfaction ratings and feature metrics. Users appreciated being able to create and test landing pages with the program, but found it glitchy at times. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend ion interactive at a rate of 82%.

Evergage is a conversion rate optimization tool that aims to boost conversions and optimize conversion rates through real-time personalization.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Evergage moved from a High Performer to a Niche product.
• Satisfaction decreased 17 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on Evergage reviewer feedback:

• Organizations saw a 46% user adoption on average.
• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 6 months.
• The majority of Evergage reviewers work for mid-market businesses (59% at companies with 51-1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Evergage's:

• Personalization. Users liked being able to access specific data about customer behavior and use it to make real-time customizations to encourage conversion. This is reflected in Evergage’s custom targeting feature satisfaction rating (93% vs. avg. 87%).
• Quality of support. Many reviewers mentioned that the support team is responsive and helpful. This is mirrored in a 92% satisfaction rating for Evergage (avg. 89%).
• Segmentation, which received a 90% satisfaction rating (avg. 84%). Reviewers liked that Evergage segments their visitors and encourages the creation of targeted marketing messages.

Reviewers disliked Evergage's:

• Usability. Many reviewers mentioned that there is a learning curve associated with the product. Users said that the user interface is complicated and could use improvements. This sentiment is mirrored by Evergage’s ease of use rating of 71% satisfaction (avg. 84%). Users did note, however, that Evergage is frequently working on UI improvements.
• Add-on. According to reviewers, Evergage requires a browser specific add-on, which some saw as a drawback to the product.

Product News

Recently, Evergage announced:

• In January 2016, Evergage received $10M in Series B funding. In total, Evergage has received $16.25M in funding.
• In May 2016, Evergage won a gold Stevie® Award in The 14th Annual American Business Awards.

Evergage was rated below average for most satisfaction ratings, and received mixed ratings for feature metrics. The product’s personalization features were reviewed most favorably among users, while its administration features received its lowest satisfaction ratings. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Evergage at a rate of 84%.

Qubit is an A/B testing and personalization program. The platform is able to segment visitors and deploy custom content.

Significant Numbers

Based on Qubit reviewer feedback:

• The majority of Qubit reviewers work for mid-market businesses (60% at companies with 51-,1000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Qubit's:

• JavaScript editor. The JavaScript code editor was well received by reviewers, a contrast to reviewers’ feelings about the WYSIWYG editor.
• Quality of support. There were many glowing mentions of the Qubit support team as professional, helpful, and knowledgeable. This is echoed in the product’s quality of support rating of 95% satisfaction (avg. 89%).

Reviewers disliked Qubit's:

• WYSIWYG editor. Reviewers said that the WYSIWYG editor is simple enough for non-technical users to use, but is rather unsophisticated. Complex changes require a more technical understanding of the site. Qubit’s WYSIWYG feature is rated at 74% satisfaction, 8% lower than the category average of 82%.
• Heat maps, which received a rating of 69% satisfaction (avg. 77%).

Product News

Recently, Qubit announced:

• In February 2016, Qubit received $40M in Series C funding. In total, Qubit has received $74.85M in four rounds of funding.
• In April 2016, Qubit released its Adaptive Targeting tool that works across back-end systems to speed up segmentation.

Qubit received mixed ratings overall. While Qubit provides excellent customer service, aspects of the WYSIWYG editor are rather unsophisticated, according to reviewers. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Qubit at a rate of 86%.

SiteSpect is an A/B and multivariate testing solution for web and mobile sites. It also offers targeting and personalization capabilities.

Market Changes

Since G2 Crowd’s Winter 2016 Conversion Rate Optimization Grid℠ Report:

• Satisfaction increased 12 points (normalized for the Conversion Rate Optimization category).

Significant Numbers

Based on SiteSpect reviewer feedback:

• The average reviewer achieved a return on investment in 15 months.
• The majority of SiteSpect reviewers work for enterprise-level businesses (64% at companies with more than 1,000 employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked SiteSpect's:

• Variation testing. SiteSpect is rated at or above average for all variation testing features including multivariate testing (92% vs. avg. 84%) and split URL testing (92% vs. avg. 86%).
• Quality of support. Several reviewers mentioned the quality of SiteSpect’s customer support team.

Reviewers disliked SiteSpect's:

• Usability. SiteSpect’s ease of use is rated 14% below average at 70% satisfaction (avg. 84%). This is the lowest rating for this metric in the Conversion Rate Optimization category. Users said the system is very useful and powerful, but its implementation and use requires a knowledge of standard coding languages and regular expressions.
• WYSIWYG editor. SiteSpect rated lowest for this feature in the Conversion Rate Optimization category (63% vs. avg. 82%).

Overall, SiteSpect received satisfaction ratings at or below the category averages. It was also rated near or below category averages for most feature metrics, with the exception of variation testing features. While reviewers liked SiteSpect for testing, the product fell short in functionality. Reviewers called SiteSpect a unique solution that may require additional support from a programmer or technical team. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend SiteSpect at a rate of 87%.

Crazy Egg is an in-page analytics tool. It provides visualizations of user pathing data such as heat maps, scroll maps, and click confetti maps.

Significant Numbers

Based on Crazy Egg reviewer feedback:

• The majority of Crazy Egg reviewers work for small businesses (62% at companies with 50 or fewer employees).

Reviewer Feedback

Based on review ratings and short-answer responses, users liked Crazy Egg's:

• Heat maps, which received a 95% satisfaction rating (avg. 79%). Users mentioned using Crazy Egg’s heat map functionality to aid in content optimization and visualizing visitors’ activity on a page.
• Ease of setup. A handful of reviewers mentioned that Crazy Egg is simple to implement. According to reviewers, the product is implemented by adding a javascript code snippet to a website. Ease of setup for Crazy Egg received an 89% satisfaction rating, 5% higher than the category average of 84%.

Reviewers disliked Crazy Egg's:

• Report snapshots. Reviewers were dissatisfied with how the application manages report snapshots. Crazy Egg received a rating of 77% satisfaction for reports and dashboards (avg. 84%).
• Ease of admin, which received a rating of 75% (avg. 86%). Reviewers mentioned that the user interface is complex and unintuitive.

Overall, Crazy Egg received the lowest satisfaction score of any product in the Conversion Rate Optimization category, and it was rated below average for most satisfaction ratings and feature metrics offered by the product. Users didn’t rely solely on Crazy Egg for conversion rate optimization, but recommended the product for understanding user behavior on a new page via heat maps, inspiration for new A/B tests, and explaining CRO methods to someone unfamiliar with web analytics. Reviewers, on average, said that they would be likely to recommend Crazy Egg at a rate of 78%.