Crowdbooster was a tool to measure the success of Twitter and Facebook posts, with visualizations to track retweets, and track potential impressions created, likes, comments, and how many shares a Facebook post has received. Crowdbooster is no longer available.
N/A
Parse.ly
Score 7.8 out of 10
N/A
Parse.ly is a content optimization platform for online publishers. It provides in-depth analytics and helps maximize the performance of the digital content. It features a dashboard geared for editorial and business staff and an API that can be used by a product team to create personalized or contextual experiences on a website.
It is a platform that is singularly focused. It does not have a lot of the additions that come stock with other platforms such as robust reporting or deeper insights past schedule times. It is also a stand-alone platform and a lot of its primary functionality can be found in …
Crowdbooster was cost effective and provided an intuitive, easy to use interface to generate reports quickly and easily. I felt some of the other options were priced either similarly or higher, and were more complicated to use. I was really looking for a solution that was …
I use many different sites for social media analytics. Crowdbooster is used for overall statistics (followers, mentions, retweets) and monthly data and archived tweets. The other main sites used for Twitter are Cision, Radian6 and Hootsuite.
Parse.ly
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Parse.ly
Parse.ly provides clearer insights into what stories are performing strongly in real time. Its interface is more user-friendly and it is easy to compare different time periods, titles or author statistics. Chartbeat had a website overlay to show where readers are going on site, …
Parse.ly excels in providing detailed insights into how users are interacting with specific pieces of content, allowing us to make data-driven decisions about content strategy and optimization. Its real-time reporting also provides us with immediate feedback on the …
Doesn't come with an integrated overlay like Chartbeat, but is more intuitive (just) than GA. Seems more accurate and detailed than Chartbeat but less than GA. It's my go-to for day-to-day traffic engagement but monthly I'm more likely to look at in-house GA-generated reports.
Firstly, I didn't make the business decision to use Parse.ly. I'm just an employee using it. However, the first thing you notice is the change in appearance. Parse.ly's dashboard looks far more complicated than Chartbeat's and the black, white, and green theme [are] not as …
Parse.ly has very rich products and market use in media for content analytics. [The] dashboard provides [a] holistic view on the overall site visitor's information and what needs improvements. [The] dashboard is divided based on sections, author, posts, pages, etc., on the site …
Adobe Analytics is our organization's "official" data source and provides a much more in-depth feature set and customizable reporting tool. It's much less user-friendly than Parse.ly but can provide more detailed reporting. Google Analytics is used by my organization as a …
I used Google Analytics for years. I loved it and still love it. Google Analytics isn't as robust as Parse.ly and doesn't have some of the same capabilities, nor do I trust the data as much. But Google Analytics is still really good, and it's free. If I were at a …
Parse.ly is far more user-friendly than Google Analytics, which feels like a developer's tool by comparison. Parse.ly feels like it is designed for ease of access and use. While analyzing trends is more difficult in Google Analytics, it is straightforward in Parse.ly. Google …
I use then in tandem; where Parse.ly lacks, I go over to Google Analytics and vice versa. Sometimes I need to look deeper at referral sources and that is where Parse.ly isn't as strong, especially if I am looking at a bigger set of content.
Parse.ly works better than Google Analytics. This is mainly due to its simplicity whereas Google Analytics can quickly become quite complicated with a lot of moving parts. Parse.ly, on the other hand, is quick to learn and understand while also providing a lot of information.
Parse.ly is easier to use and more self-explanatory than Google Analytics. The site essentially explains itself upon visiting it. Chartbeat was quite good but I believe Parse.ly provides more granular details on web traffic and gives the user more insights into how and why …
Parse.ly is easier to track and to understand for me than the features that Google Analytics offers. Nonetheless, graphics seems to be more complex in Google's environment, which [I feel] can be a weakness for Parse.ly in the case of Data Analysts. Although, both are used in …
It is a great tool if you are time and resource-strapped and need assistance in expanding the reach and use of your social media platforms. It is also more beneficial to use if you are a marketing agency. Though you can use it as an individual or individual organization, it might be too much of an upfront set up cost to make it very useful long term.
For people working in online media, or digital content creators, the platform could help them understand their audience and allow them to interact with them in a user-friendly way. Since the digital media industry is booming, Parse.ly can allow the user and the content creators to meet each other's demands and reduce redundancies and bombard the users with unnecessary content.
Timed social media posts - Crowdbooster provides the opportunity to schedule social media posts allowing you to work on other important social media tasks.
Simply beautiful tracking - There are millions of ways to measure social media impact. Crowdbooster offers the most important and relevant measurements in simplified charts..
Great UI - Crappy UI = crappy experience. Crowdbooster's UI is easy to navigate. It won't take months to learn where all the buttons are.
Real-time metrics are great and help us decide what content to follow up on.
Audience segmenting is key, helps us determine where we're strong and where we're not.
Historical metrics are also helpful in helping us see what readers come back to overtime, which drives decisions about what content to devote more resources to producing.
The ranked order of twitter followers and the number of "tweet impressions" did not help that much. Those "tweet impressions" were not really an estimate of how many people were actually reading my tweet. It was simply a sum of followers of the person retweeting a tweet and the sum of all followers from a subsequent retweet of the initial retweet. All this told me was the best case scenario I could expect if ALL followers of a person that retweeted saw my tweet. This is not a true measure of "twitter footprint" – since the “signal to noise” ratio in Twitter is very low.
There was no system in place to track "clicked links" for links embedded in tweets and/or facebook wall posts. Hootsuite did a good job of this – but only for twitter.
The list of recommended times to tweet were always "on the hour" (i.e. 10 a.m, 1 p.m.). Never were the times ever at "half past the hour" etc. An independent study that I did on my own using Google Analytics (and campaign links using google's URL builder) helped me determine that my optimal "Tweet time" during the week is 3:30 p.m. ET. More importantly, the recommended times seemed to be roughly the same on the weekends - which I find strange given that social media behavior does change on the weekends.
Occasionally, in my facebook ranked table of "loyal fans", I would see people in there that had not "liked" or "commented" on a post for months at a stretch and the "look back" period of the table was only around 7 days or so. Hence, I occasionally had to question the accuracy of that table.
Simple to use and a great value for what it offers. It has a simple but clean interface and it provides fantastic historical data you can use to measure your efforts online. By using a tool like Crowdbooster, you can see what is working with your audience and what isn't. From there, you can start tweaking your strategies
Cost is always a factor when considering any renewal, so we will always see how that compares to other offerings, but we have been pleased with the functionality from Parse.ly. Importantly, it has engaged news teams, and writers can easily assess their own performance--it is not just a management tool. This wider take-up makes it more likely that we would renew.
I found it fairly intuitive and easy to use. The information is laid out cleanly, and the most important information appears at a glance on the home page. However, I have worked with other users who had a hard time switching between platforms and identifying where other information was buried. It's not always clear that something is a clickable button! The option to export results is also a bit buried, and not integrated with the date range option.
The Parse.ly platform is very user-friendly and easy to use. User management is simple, and reporting setup only takes a few minutes. They provide very helpful documentation for implementing the scripts on your site and have great customer support to help with custom development such as implementing their content recommendation engine.
I do not think it is as supported as it once was when it first arrived on the social media scene. It is an older platform whose main functionality may have already ran its course.
Seems to be more bugs than I encounter in Google Analytics, but Parse.ly is always very quick to answer my questions or fix something. It seems like most of my issues are due to communications around my requests being outside of the package we pay for with this tool (i.e., only two years of data).
Crowdbooster was cost effective and provided an intuitive, easy to use interface to generate reports quickly and easily. I felt some of the other options were priced either similarly or higher, and were more complicated to use. I was really looking for a solution that was flexible and that would grow with our program and staff.
Parse.ly excels in providing detailed insights into how users are interacting with specific pieces of content, allowing us to make data-driven decisions about content strategy and optimization. Its real-time reporting also provides us with immediate feedback on the effectiveness of content changes, which is particularly important for content-heavy sites that need to iterate quickly.
Increased efficiency. I am able to generate useful snapshot reports in seconds. Particularly useful when you need answers fast (such as on a phone call).
Peace of mind. I am able to compare the data in Crowdbooster to what is exported from Facebook and Twitter.
Quicker, simpler evaluation of results. I am able to more easily compare impressions with engagement data to see what is working, and what should change. Particularly useful in day-to-day analysis.
Sometimes in meetings our editorial director will point out stories that didn't perform well. To us, that means readers don't really care about the topic, so we'll pivot away from writing about that in the future. That might not be "business objectives" though.