Dynamic Yield is presented as an AI-powered Experience Optimization platform that delivers individualized experiences at every customer touchpoint: web, apps, email, kiosks, IoT, and call centers. The platform’s data management capabilities provide for a unified view of the customer, to allow the rapid and scalable creation of highly targeted digital interactions. Marketers, product managers, and engineers use Dynamic Yield for: Launching new personalization…
N/A
VWO
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
VWO is an A/B testing and conversion optimization platform that enables growing businesses to conduct qualitative and quantitative visitor research, build an experimentation roadmap and run continuous experiments on their digital properties. With its 5 capabilities Plan, Track, Test, Analyze, and Target, it brings the entire CRO (conversion rate optimization) process at one place. VWO helps online businesses follow the process- and data-driven conversion…
$99
per month
Pricing
Dynamic Yield
VWO
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Subscription
$99.00
per month
TESTING
Get a Demo
The classic VWO A/B testing solution
CONVERSION OPTIMIZATION
Get a Demo
The all-in-one platform for all your optimization needs
ENTERPRISE
Get a Demo
Customized solution with advanced AB testing and conversion optimization capabilities
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Dynamic Yield
VWO
Free Trial
Yes
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Dynamic Yield
VWO
Considered Both Products
Dynamic Yield
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Dynamic Yield
Better Product Recommendations, Ease of Use, Affinity based Personalisation, Predictive Targeting and out of the box templates.
It's mostly the speed and efficiency that make Dynamic Yield the go-to platform. It's very customizable, and tracking can be done in real-time, which is a strong point. Built-in component testing enables all team members to view and track changes easily. Not only that, it is a …
While each of the other platforms may have certain features or aspects that are stronger than Dynamic Yield, Dynamic Yield is certainly the best platform I've used of the ones listed. The ability to do both experimentation and personalization in one platform (and to have a tool …
Dynamic Yield has many more features than Google Optimize so this allowed us to hit many more use cases which may have previously been out of reach. We switched to Dynamic Yield after Google Optimize was shut down.
We can do a lot more with Dynamic Yield with not just the testing side of things but the product recommendations, personalisation and the out of the box features.
Dynamic Yield provides far more capability and ready-to-go templates for small-medium sized businesses, as well as decent API implementation for businesses who want to have a deeper integration. The ease of implementation and faster time-to-market is why we chose Dynamic Yield.
Dynamic Yield is leaps-and-bounds beyond other platforms when it comes to advanced capabilities. If all you want is to A/B tests two separate landing pages, it is probably overkill. If you want to optimize your customer's digital experience across audience-types, including …
No contest between Convert and Optimizely - those are very decent A/B test programs but also standard. The biggest contender was A/B Tasty and we chose DY due to the ease of client vs server side implementation within the platform and robust analytics/product recommendation …
You get a lot more for the amount you pay compared with similar offerings. The out of the box templates also make it easier to get started especially if there is limited engineering resource. Like that it supports testing / personalization / recommender at the same time.
Dynamic Yield has proven to surpass my experiences with both Optimizely and Braze in many ways - notably with contact time and support from the team, which has made a huge difference to the success of the tool for us. But also in my experience, I've found there to be a much …
We've used product recommendations through our website platform and while it was a couple of years ago and I can't remember exactly who we reviewed, we did compare Dynamic Yield to two or three other competitors before deciding to move forward with them.
Because you can use both personalization and A/B testing in one platform was the biggest reason for moving forward with Dynamic Yield. Also having a dedicated customer success manager was also a reason to move forward.
Dynamic Yield is easier to use and the customer support hands down is the best we have ever encountered. The out-of-the-box campaigns are greater and easier to use on Dynamic Yield.
DY can be linked to the product feed allowing use cases that are not possible on a simple testing solution. Also, DY is simple to use for the marketing team, there is no need for technical knowledge to set most of the experiences. To conclude, DY can be used as a CDP with a …
Dynamic yield has everything you need out of the box where VWO pricing is tiered which can be frustrating. Dynamic yield is solid on personalization and more flexible with what can be done and achieved.
As I mentioned, VWO is a great all-in-one tool that lets clients research & test all within one tool. It's a little on the expensive side so it might not deliver the desired ROI for smaller clients and can also encourage the small clients to run small, insignificant A/B tests …
We used to use Proof, but when we then stacked them up against VWO, VWO had some additional functionality and integration capabilities that Proof did not have which gave us greater ability to do some more website experimentation and personalisation options. VWO integrates with …
VWO is by far the easiest tool to use among all experimentation tools. It is like the experimentation tool for dummies and works as well as the others. A highlight would be the reports on every test because compared to the others, in VWO is way much easier to understand the …
Basically, they have the same features but VWO is much cheaper than the paid version of optimize. If you don't need to do more than 5 experiments at a time, then the free version of Optimize is great. If you do need to be able to do more than that, then VWO is a great …
Vs. Google optimize VWO is much better: * Setting up a test, the GUI is much better. * Performance (loading times) is better, improving conversion rates.
I did not evaluate all of the other software choices in this decision, but my understanding is that VWO is best in class to optimize website experiences.
The competitors that might be worth checking out: Google Analytics, Unbounce, Instapage, Evergage, Landingi, ion Interactive …
While there are many free or cheap options for A/B and multivariate testing out there (and we have tried several), VWO provides the right balance between cost and capability for our agency. That, and the level of customer service provided when we need it makes VWO our choice …
We use VWO not in competition with, but alongside other tools, as we believe a mixture is the best recipe for success. Hotjar is a slightly different offering and has some very strong heatmap/ journey mapping capabilities. We tend to use it for that, with the insight feeding …
There are significant differences in each platform when it comes to optimizely and vwo. From a functionality and performance perspective they each have their pros and cons. It is important to go through the feature sets of each and ensure the solution you select will work …
I used Google Optimize when it had just launched. It was therefore not yet a competitor to VWO. I haven't used it in roughly half a year time, so a lot has probably changed.
I still use Hotjar for certain features that VWO offers, but which I think function better in Hotjar. I …
VWO has worse usability and isn't as flexible as the other platforms. Also, the insight that Qubit and Optimizely generates is actually accurate and can be used compared to the reports that VWO provide.
We enquired and looked into using Optimizely and Qubit before deciding on VWO. All appear to be great tools that would have done the job required, however, when compared, we didn't hit the level of traffic for Qubit to consider a partnership, and Optimizely was a lot more …
VWO is much better than others at providing an easy way to run tests and gather data, but we do currently supplement it with Hotjar for better heatmap tracking and detailed visitor tracking. We also use Google Analytics for general traffic sourcing and behavior, as well as …
I was not involved in optimizely, nor did we implement it outside a free trial I believe, but VWO seemed to do generally the same things with a lower cost, though I could be mistaken.
I have used qualtrics in the past. It is very good for survey creation and logic. I know some …
VWO is way more comprehensive and powerful. We selected VWO because of multiple factors including pricing, capabilities, and last but not least, support. It's quite important to be able to liaise with the platform when building tests.
It's ideal for testing continuous improvements in user experience - we're achieving good results from A/B testing and multivariate testing, and tracking the impact is very slick and compelling. We currently don't have any Dynamic Yield integrations set up for our app due to the complexities involved. We are also unable to track user behavior on platforms nested outside our domain (such as CTAs on our site that link to external booking engines).
Our marketing team does a lot of creative testing around messaging and imagery. VWO is well suited for this type of testing and can yield great results if you define your conversion goals correctly. However, when we have tried to do more substantial/advanced changes through VWO (such as re-positioning content or modifying elements in a form), we have had some challenges and not been able to get the desired tests working correctly.
VWO has a strong support team willing to help provide answers to questions during the setup process. During setup, we had some questions regarding implementation across a significant number of sites and they were able to ease dev team concerns and provide detailed best practices to streamline integration.
Some of the initial results of a few of the initial tests raised some questions internally. We setup a call and were able to quickly address the questions and find some opportunities to leverage moving forward.
I discovered a bug within the UI that lead to some questions internally. I was able to report it and the problem was fixed rather quickly and their team followed up with a thank you for reporting it and to report the issue was now resolved.
The impact (either positive or negative) of potentially overlapping campaigns, especially the UX personalization or custom code campaigns, may not be easily identifiable.
It would make more sense for the new deep-learning and machine learning (ML) driven strategies be made part of the standard offering, as opposed to positioning them as add-on subscription, given that many other completing services are baking in ML as part of their platform evolution.
The documentation on the API and custom code implementation can be fleshed out further.
The heatmaps within A/B tests are overlayed on the live website. Unfortunately, these don't work properly when scrolling down the site.
I am missing an overview of all my custom conversions. I can only see a list of frequently used goals while setting up an A/B test, which may or may not include all custom conversions.
implementation took a long time but also, DY has really proven that they are transforming and adapting their platform to be more user friendly and the right technology choice for their brand or company
Visual Website Optimizer is a easy to use and powerful tool for testing web pages. We use it to test lead generation websites to increase the number of people that complete a form. Before we decided to go with Visual Website Optimizer we did research into other options and found Visual Website Optimizer to be one of the best.
Overall, the interface is not difficult to understand. Although to create campaigns or define strategies for recommendations, some study is required.
Also, some reports are hidden, you really need to know where to look in order to see them (e.g. strategies performance or email campaigns performance).
Also, there is a lack of context help that would improve a lot the usability, especially when you face a feature or a report for the first time.
Overall VWO is quite good with general user usability, and every person who has had to take up the mantle of using the tool itself has found it manageable. However there is definitely some room for improvement - again, perhaps this is particularly the case because we are running a large number of tests in a number of different languages (and markets, and countries!) which requires a lot of upkeep.
VWO doesn't appear to slow down our website at all, though some customers with adblockers like UBlock Origin have been known to not see entire pages if VWO is making changes to the page at a macro level (background, font, etc). This is rare though.
Allison Schwartz, Customer Success Manager at Dynamic Yield has been nothing less than amazing and stellar! She really sets the standard for customer success and support. Their technical support is fast and reliable, and their educational resources are top of the line
While their online document support is lacking a simple email to their support team will almost always get responded to the next day. It has however taken more than one email to explain the problem to the support team till they understood the problem. The solution I was given also only half fixed the problem the rest I figured out on my own.
Training was good, just limited to the onboarding process. They walked through all of the steps it takes to get started in VWO and each of the modules, along with giving us ideas for starting our first test. I feel like it could be better if there was a guided process within the VWO program to continue to educate you along the way, and a way to turn that off for experienced users.
Overall, the implementation of VWO is straightforward. If you've got a straightforward way of deploying code to all of your test pages, either a good CMS or a TMS, then implementation should be a breeze. There is no tweaking to be done to the code itself, and once deployed it has the flexibility to cope with different VWO modules (tracking, conversion analysis, session analysis) without modification.
We selected Dynamic Yield because of Better Support & Partnership Experience, Superior Experimentation Capabilities, All-in-One Platform for Personalization, Testing, and Targeting Its better suited then other tools with A/B testing, better hyper personalization, AI - driven capabilities, low - code, better support
VWO is by far the easiest tool to use among all experimentation tools. It is like the experimentation tool for dummies and works as well as the others. A highlight would be the reports on every test because compared to the others, in VWO is way much easier to understand the metrics and the test performance.
The product seems infinitely scalable for our needs (small business) and we've never had any issue with loading VWO-edited elements. I will say, though, that online customers with ad blockers have been known to not see certain VWO elements as their third-party scripts are disabled.
Dynamic Yield supports us in our CRO offering as our optimisation platform of choice - we are leveraging this tool heavily in the application of these services - allowing us an ongoing income stream.
Dynamic Yields adds value to our clients - we can confidently recommend DY's recommendations and AI as better than those that are offered "out of the box" within Shopify. As a Shopify Plus agency, leveraging this better technology is often a quick way in which we can show almost immediate value to new clients to improve their conversion rate and revenue per user.
Our clients have seen significant increases in engagement and conversion rates through changes we recommended after using VWO to test our hypotheses.
Our clients and internal teams have appreciated the level of granular detail available within the platform, as more information leads to more reliable optimization suggestions.