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
GTmetrix
Score 9.9 out of 10
N/A
Gtmetrix is an analytics tool focused on determining website performance with features like page load speed details, video capture, and the ability to test from multiple regions around the world.
$10.67
per month
Pricing
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
GTmetrix
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Solo
$10.67
per month
Starter
$21.25
per month
Growth
$42.50
per month
Basic
Free
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
GTmetrix
Free Trial
No
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
Yes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
GTmetrix
Considered Both Products
Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Google Content Experiments (discontinued)
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 …
Given we are doing the work to improve in Google to a large degree - the Google product is essential. But GTMetrix may use their info as well as other independent stuff to be a little better. I appreciate the way GTMetrix provides the info - cleaner and clearer and thus quicker …
Compared to the products I have listed PageSpeed Insights is probably the closest to what GTMetrix does and many times those 2 tabs are open side by side. SEMrush is a full SEO platform and though it can do much of what GTmetrix does it is also quite expensive and does a lot …
The data visualization aspect of GTmetrix is better than the competition. It uses letters A, B, and C to help rate speed and performance. It shows the time, size of the page, and uses colors as well. Green is fast, orange and red are slow (poor). There are also articles …
GTmetrix gathers data from both Google PageSpeed and YSlow at same time, so we're using it more often than Google's alternative. On the other hand, Google PageSpeed offers neat features like download optimized images, scripts and CSS (which GTmetrix don't), so it could be a …
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.
GTmetrix is very well suited for small organizations or startups that do not have sufficient technical staff for site optimization. GTmetrix also comes with the free version, which allows users to use their service for free for up to three websites, which is a good option. However, this might not be the best option for a large organization that works in different technical domains and have a good number of technical staff.
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.
They might consider improving their checking process speed, it often takes a huge time to display the performance report. This is even longer for non-logged-in users.
Previously two different options of Google's Pagespeeds and Yahoo's lighthouse were shown in the report section, now only combined report is shown. I personally like the two reports from different sources.
Non-tech savvy persons might not find it so easy to use.
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.
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.
I have never had the need to use GTmetrix support. Therefore, there is really no way for me to give a grade here. However, if you are on a paid plan my guess and it is a guess, is that their support is as good as the tool is. There are a lot more features in the paid plans, reporting. monitoring etc. I could see where support could come into play as these features are added to the account
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.
Given we are doing the work to improve in Google to a large degree - the Google product is essential. But GTMetrix may use their info as well as other independent stuff to be a little better. I appreciate the way GTMetrix provides the info - cleaner and clearer and thus quicker to address.
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.