Convert Experiences is an experimentation platform that offers features and support to run A/B tests across multiple growth channels. Its enterprise-ready advanced features include full stack experimentation, multi-page testing, post-segmentation, sequential testing, targeting with 40+ filters, triggering tests based on data in other apps (data sources), dynamic triggers, complex goal tracking, and a secure API. It includes 90+ out-of-the box integrations in a…
$299
per month 100k tested users per month
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
Google Content Experiments was a tool that can be used to create A/B test from within Google Analytics. It has been discontinued since 2019, and Google now recommends using its Google Optimize service for A/B testing.
N/A
Pricing
Convert Experiences
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
Editions & Modules
Growth
$299
per month 100k tested users per month
Pro
$5988
per year 3M tested users available upfront
Enterprise
Pricing available on request
From 1M tested users/mo (billed annually)
Enterprise
Pricing available on request
From 1M tested users/mo (billed annually)
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Convert Experiences
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
1. Annual contract or monthly payments available (40% discount for annual pricing).
2. Pricing is not feature dependent. Some features like integrations, goals, Live Logs are necessary to test successfully. This is why Convert caps by unique tested users - basically visitors who have been bucketed to see a variation and are unique to that variation. As a result the app tested users are always </= the site's net traffic.
Three words: value for money. In a due diligence comparison, Convert Experiences came up more than twice less expensive than the nearest competitor, while offering more product features, better performance and a quick response time with support/sales agents that actually …
Convert Experiences sits in a niche of great products, against which it competes very well and remains held in high regard as it achieves pretty much everything that the bigger platforms put on the table but in a more cost-effective model. The reason we initially chose …
Convert has the best JS code editor for advanced users (and developers). It doesn't have as great integration with GA as Google Optimize, but it also doesn't have a limit to 5 tests at one time. It's also much easier to use than Optimizely.
Although not as robust as Adobe Target, Convert fills the niche with solid functionality at a great price. Comparable to Optimizely and far above Google Optimize.
Although VWO is slightly cheaper it flickers quite a bit, hence why I originally looked into alternative software to use for A/B testing. VWO also has other features that could be useful, but they can be found in tools you may already be using, like Hotjar. Also, their support …
Convert was selected based on price point, feature set, and UI/UX. All three are very friendly to new testers and small to mid-market size companies. Their UI and tool workflow is the best out of all of the non-enterprise solutions that I have tried. There is some small room …
There were a number of other tools I used. Specifically though: they expose the DMP features that some other companies price into oblivion and enterprise levels (if the other tools have them at all!)
I feel like I've gushed a lot about the DMP and power user features of Convert …
The biggest point for Convert Experiences is definitely the price and the completeness of their packages. Their Magento plugin makes it great for running tests on ecommerce stores. One thing that's missing for me is deeper insights into revenue (something optimizely does …
Visual Website Optimizer's feature set is not as well suited to advanced experiments (it doesn't seem to allow direct editing of variation code). Optimizely is expensive and their agency plan requires a 12 month minimum contract. Support is not as great. Optimizely also does …
While Optimizely is an amazing A/B testing tool, Convert has almost the exact same offerings but at a much lower cost. The customer and technical support are excellent as well, and Dennis's insights and strategy calls are very helpful.
Visual Website Optimizer costs too much and misses a lot of transactions due to third-party cookies. Optimizely flat out refused to support Shopify. They withdrew their app from the marketplace in 2014.
Google Content Experiments is a free tool and the leading tool in the industry. It's pretty simple to set up a test and use content experiments to monitor objectives once Google Analytics is installed. Less experienced team members can run tests with some training. There are …
It frankly was down to cost. Other platforms offer better targeting etc., however, we found that unless we could demonstrate early value - we didn't get budget sign off. Our teams aren't usually large enough to justify the cost and time to invest in a more complex platform - so …
Google Website Optimizer was a better product but has been discontinued. We have also used Test and Target , which has more features but we have been doing fine with Google Content Experiments. Most testing situations can be handled with Google Content Experiments.
Google Content Experiment cannot compete with Adobe Test and Target, Quadratics or even Optimizley. It is harder to use with no editing interface, so pages must be actually developed. It doesn't allow for any advanced segmenting or multivarient testing. But it is free, so …
Google CE is free, Optimizely isn't plus only until recently I found out that Optimizely can work with multiple goals, however, this was found by meeting their employees at a trade show and not via their website.
We'd use content experiments as a complimentary testing tool alongside more comprehensive testing packages out there. As a free testing tool it does the job for basic A/B testing.
If you are looking for a more advanced great value for money solution I would recommend investigating Visual Website Optimizer. For a more powerful enterprise level solution with the option to have a fully managed service I would recommend Maxymiser.
Google Content Experiments provides significantly more insight, historical data and analysis than Unbounce. However, if you do need a solution that offers a WYSIWYG editor, landing page hosting, and limited reporting and testing, Unbounce is a good all-in-one solution and that …
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
GCE isn't better or worse than any of these, it's just different. When I have the time to build a new page, setup the testing scripts, and go - then I'll use GCE. If I'm doing multivariate I use VWO. If I'm testing a quick button or headline change, I use Optimizely or UnBounce.
Google CE does a great job streamlining tools and features. Optimizely does not offer nearly the same amount of tools or resources that G CE does. I would use CE in the future but stay away from Optimizely. Google also has a lot more resources for accruing knowledge on it …
Features
Convert Experiences
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
Testing and Experimentation
Comparison of Testing and Experimentation features of Product A and Product B
Convert Experiences
9.4
Ratings
14% above category average
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
9.2
Ratings
11% above category average
a/b experiment testing
9.90 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Split URL testing
10.00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Multivariate testing
9.80 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Multi-page/funnel testing
9.00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Cross-browser testing
9.50 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Mobile app testing
9.10 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Test significance
10.00 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Visual / WYSIWYG editor
9.80 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Advanced code editor
9.90 Ratings
9.00 Ratings
Page surveys
9.10 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Visitor recordings
9.10 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Preview mode
10.00 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Test duration calculator
7.40 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Experiment scheduler
6.90 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Experiment workflow and approval
9.10 Ratings
8.00 Ratings
Dynamic experiment activation
10.00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Client-side tests
10.00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Server-side tests
8.90 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Mutually exclusive tests
10.00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Audience Segmentation & Targeting
Comparison of Audience Segmentation & Targeting features of Product A and Product B
Convert Experiences
9.9
Ratings
15% above category average
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
10.0
Ratings
16% above category average
Standard visitor segmentation
10.00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Behavioral visitor segmentation
9.80 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Traffic allocation control
10.00 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Website personalization
9.80 Ratings
10.00 Ratings
Results and Analysis
Comparison of Results and Analysis features of Product A and Product B
Definitely well suited for budget conscious companies that want a solid array of functionality but without having to pay an exorbitant amount. Great for marketing and analytics team members that need the ability to get in and set up tests w/o dev assistance. But, functionality is there for developers to get in and set up more complicated tests.
Google Content Experiments is suited for large and small organizations, no matter your organizational goals. It is not recommended for organizations that are only interested in qualitative data, as there are other tools for receiving specific user experience feedback. It is also not recommended that you implement tests without some sort of goal in mind.
The platform is good value for money, comparing its features and prices to some of the bigger players.
The tool is very flexible and can be used for simpler tests right through to much more challenging and rewarding testing but does require a more thorough knowledge of the platform.
Their support team is always available and always responsive, not resting until resolutions are met.
When you need to measure against event-based goals
If you need to see how the test variations performed against secondary goals
Given that the the platform requires you actually code a new page with a unique URL, this tool can be good for radical redesigns.
Great insights into other information about your testing groups, like whether or not they're mobile, screen size, browser, or really any dimension available in GA.
The only thing I'm really missing is segmentation during or after testing of the results by device, new users etc., within the results page. Targeting of users based on segments is obviously possible.
There are a few inconsistencies in their user interface that I would have liked to see differently. This could be personal taste though.
Content Experiments just makes it is simple and easy to implement A|B tests. We will be evaluating other tools in search of a more robust system for multivariate and cross-page testing, such as Optimizely or Visual Website Optimizer. However, for basic testing, you can't really beat it.
To use the platform in the context of developing enhanced tests that stretch the platform there is as with most things a learning curve. However, if you're a casual user or have standard experiments that you wish to run you would be easily able to hit the ground running.
Using the free tool, overall "live support" is limited. However, there are plenty of online resources to get started. If you need handheld support, it is best to upgrade the service or hire a developer through one of Google's partner agencies. There could be more support for understanding what makes a test useful or not.
Convert was selected based on price point, feature set, and UI/UX. All three are very friendly to new testers and small to mid-market size companies. Their UI and tool workflow is the best out of all of the non-enterprise solutions that I have tried. There is some small room for improvement, but that only really affects power users or tests that require significant coding/development work to execute.
Google Website Optimizer was a better product but has been discontinued. We have also used Test and Target , which has more features but we have been doing fine with Google Content Experiments. Most testing situations can be handled with Google Content Experiments.
Using Convert has allowed us to make quick decisions on site edits and price changes. Seeing and sharing quick results makes our operations much more profitable.
Connecting the tests with Shopify has produced very valuable and timely results that we can act upon as soon as we see statistically significant results.
Doing good experiments/Optimize has helped to take out the guesswork of the things we want to implement.
We have done fairly complex changes such as changing navigation and managed to see improvements outcomes immediately before we have to request developer.
Our teams have become more data centric in how they approach changes.