I can see the benefits of using WYSIWYG tools such as VWO but this is straight to the point – no fluffing around.

I highly recommend trying Google Website Optimizer before investigating any other split testing tools.

One of the downsides of GWO is the lack of support because of its free nature, but there are plenty of resources at Google and online from other sources that explain how to use the tool and navigate common issues.

Was this review helpful to you? 0  0

Google Optimizer also has “confidence scoring” feature that shows you on a sliding scale how confident you can be about the future consistency of your test data. This is one of my favorites features with GWO.

When you start using it, Google Website Optimizer will walk you through all of the steps and generates all necessary code for you – it makes things very simple.

Was this review helpful to you? 1  0

PRO: free, simple and fast to use.
CON: difficulties with cross-domain tests, no support, validating cannot be done on dynamic pages (e.g. a shopping cart that redirects if empty).

Was this review helpful to you? 0  1

The availability of Google’s datacentres means that (even in Australia and New Zealand), our clients tests run without any impact on page load times.

The sheer amount of support and documentation across the web and in Google’s forums makes this a really easy tool to pickup and run complex tests. We’ve managed to run tests that:

-Integrate with Google Analytics (To measure avaerage order value increases & more)
-Identify segments that we can target with behavioural targeting & segmentation (through BTBuckets)
-Use alternative methods for displaying content (rather than through the standard AB or MVT methods)
-Setup click-tracking and goals on other actions

Given we’re from a technical background, we understand how to implement these more advanced techniques, but I can see why other people choose other platforms over this. While the others are easier to implement the advanced techniques for a higher cost per month, GWO is simple enough that techies can implement these for free.

Another thing that people misunderstand is that the features of segmentation and targeting requires ludicrous amounts of traffic to work properly. Most businesses are better off ignoring these features anyway.

For 90% of cases I come across, GWO is all you need.

Was this review helpful to you? 4  0

Was this review helpful to you? 2  0

Was this review helpful to you? 3  0

Was this review helpful to you? 3  0

Website revenue: Two sites: $10,000–$100,000 per year, and $100,000–$1 million per year. Visitors per month: 10,000–100,000 for each website. Started using it: February 2009 Chose it because: It is easy to implement and my clients wanted an easy way to view the results of the tests. Dealing with a non-technical client, Google’s interface makes it easy to explain split testing. In conjunction with Analytics, WSO can provide valuable data for all stakeholders.

What results did you get from it?: Split testing showed that our live help button was immensely valuable. Our site visitors interacted with our live chat feature even when our live chat operators were not online. Every week we get at least 5 inquiries through our live chat button during non-business hours. In our business, if we convert 1 out of 5 of these people, we can nearly double our business in one year!

Full review: Google Website Optimizer is suitable for testing any type of website. Its easy to use interface and straightforward approach to A/B testing makes it an invaluable tool. I love the interface. It sometimes has trouble with multiple conversion tracking. We run 1 test every 2 weeks, so 5 tests thus far. I haven’t had any trouble with WSO. A step by step wizard to handle multiple conversion tracking would be beneficial. This would require a deeper integration with Analytics though.

I find Google once again has provided the best tool for free. They will need to improve the multiple conversion tracking however. Once they do that, it will be the ultimate testing tool. It is a must for any website that wants to convert visitors into avid fans.

Was this review helpful to you? 3  0

Website revenue: $1 million to $10 million. Visitors per month: 100,000–1 million. Started using it: Sept 08. Chose it because: Ease of use and I am already an Adwords user. It was very easy to setup and results are clear. Date stopped using it: Ongoing.

What results did you get from it?: Very clear results from a number of A/B split tests. Allowed us to greatly improve conversions.

Full review: I like the fact that all you need is to add some code and enter url details in admin. It takes 10 minutes to setup a new split test. We have run 3 or 4 different tests with many other planned. I would say it is only suitable if you are getting decent traffic and conversions as otherwise the results may take too long to be conclusive. I have not really needed support as the online guides make it very clear how to us the program. Provided you can add some code to your webpages then you will find it very easy to use.

Since it is free it is very hard to criticise. There may be lots of things it cannot do but I have not needed any more that what is offered.

Was this review helpful to you? 2  0

Website revenue: $100,000–$1 million per year. Visitors per month: 10,000–100,000. Started using it: May 2008. Chose it because: It’s a Google tool. We had good success with Adwords and Analytics, but had not yet tried Website Analyzer. Also, we wanted a tool where we didn’t have to install, update, and be sys admins. Date stopped using it: Still using it.

What results did you get from it?: We were able to determine which pages converted traffic to opt-ins for a number of landing pages (we have themed landing pages to match search queries).

Full review: As with most Google Tools it’s pretty damn good. It’s fairly easy to set up, and it prompts you to test the configuration before going live so you don’t have any bad surprises. I like that it is integrated inside the adwords/analytics system so you have all the tools in one place.

The thing I like the least is this tool requires a lot more traffic (time) to get results than a full Taguchi multivariate testing tool. We have run a couple dozen experiments and still have some running. But almost all of them are simple A/B split tests in order to get results faster.

As for level of technical expertise… if you can setup adwords, you can setup this testing tool. This tool would be fine for a small business as long as they realize results will take a while based on how much traffic they get. It’s definitely easy to use. And it’s fine for larger businesses who don’t want to install and maintain their own in house systems. Google scales well and can handle a lot of traffic.

Was this review helpful to you? 6  1