Adobe Test and Target is an A/B, multi-variate testing platform which Adobe acquired as part of the Omniture platform in 2009. It is now part of the Adobe Marketing Cloud. It offers tight integration with Adobe analytics and content management products.
N/A
Instapage
Score 9.6 out of 10
Mid-Size Companies (51-1,000 employees)
Instapage is used by marketers to create, optimize, and personalize landing pages without coding skills. With its built-in optimization tools like A/B Testing, Ad-to-Page Personalization, and Heatmaps, marketers can launch more campaigns faster and accelerate their conversions.
$99
per month per user
Pricing
Adobe Target
Instapage
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Create
$99
per month 15,000 unique monthly visitors
Optimize
starting at $199
per month starting with 30,000 unique monthly visitors
Convert
Custom Pricing
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Adobe Target
Instapage
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
20% discount for annual pricing.
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Adobe Target
Instapage
Features
Adobe Target
Instapage
Testing and Experimentation
Comparison of Testing and Experimentation features of Product A and Product B
Adobe Target
8.1
18 Ratings
3% below category average
Instapage
-
Ratings
a/b experiment testing
9.418 Ratings
00 Ratings
Split URL testing
8.617 Ratings
00 Ratings
Multivariate testing
8.017 Ratings
00 Ratings
Multi-page/funnel testing
8.314 Ratings
00 Ratings
Cross-browser testing
8.39 Ratings
00 Ratings
Mobile app testing
8.57 Ratings
00 Ratings
Test significance
8.415 Ratings
00 Ratings
Visual / WYSIWYG editor
7.515 Ratings
00 Ratings
Advanced code editor
6.614 Ratings
00 Ratings
Page surveys
8.77 Ratings
00 Ratings
Visitor recordings
8.49 Ratings
00 Ratings
Preview mode
8.316 Ratings
00 Ratings
Test duration calculator
8.116 Ratings
00 Ratings
Experiment scheduler
8.415 Ratings
00 Ratings
Experiment workflow and approval
7.612 Ratings
00 Ratings
Dynamic experiment activation
7.412 Ratings
00 Ratings
Client-side tests
8.115 Ratings
00 Ratings
Server-side tests
7.510 Ratings
00 Ratings
Mutually exclusive tests
7.716 Ratings
00 Ratings
Audience Segmentation & Targeting
Comparison of Audience Segmentation & Targeting features of Product A and Product B
Adobe Target
8.3
18 Ratings
5% below category average
Instapage
-
Ratings
Standard visitor segmentation
8.018 Ratings
00 Ratings
Behavioral visitor segmentation
7.517 Ratings
00 Ratings
Traffic allocation control
8.418 Ratings
00 Ratings
Website personalization
9.116 Ratings
00 Ratings
Results and Analysis
Comparison of Results and Analysis features of Product A and Product B
Adobe Target
8.1
18 Ratings
6% below category average
Instapage
-
Ratings
Heatmap tool
7.98 Ratings
00 Ratings
Click analytics
7.715 Ratings
00 Ratings
Scroll maps
8.88 Ratings
00 Ratings
Form fill analysis
8.28 Ratings
00 Ratings
Conversion tracking
8.615 Ratings
00 Ratings
Goal tracking
8.117 Ratings
00 Ratings
Test reporting
8.118 Ratings
00 Ratings
Results segmentation
8.316 Ratings
00 Ratings
CSV export
8.315 Ratings
00 Ratings
Experiments results dashboard
7.418 Ratings
00 Ratings
SEO and Conversion Optimization
Comparison of SEO and Conversion Optimization features of Product A and Product B
If you're using the Adobe stack and tools to power your website, Target is a great solution to implement. I've utilized Target within two organizations, one running on Adobe Experience Manager (AEM), and the other on Adobe Magento. I don't see how companies could harness the full capacity of Target without also having Adobe Analytics integrated. This is their 'secret sauce' and might not be a good solution for companies who are invested in Google Analytics 360. Integration was straightforward but did require support from the Adobe team to implement successfully. While Target is a great tool for digital teams to support, you'll need your tech team aligned and available to support implementation.
Well-suited for simple landing pages which don't have any complex functionality. Great for creating landing pages for lead generation campaigns - as it comes with tons of excellent templates and a variety of forms. Not great for pages that contain a lot of information and can potentially be very long. We found that Instapage is not a great fit for building pages that need to be updated frequently, like a blog page.
This application gives us an incredible integration with Adobe Analytics that allows its operation to be the best and determine the performance of our website.
It offers us an analysis based on user behavior and a web page customization option to adapt and meet the needs of those users.
Instapage makes it easy to frame out a landing page really quickly. They provide template blocks for various components of a landing page (header, features, testimonials, etc.) that you can easily modify for your own needs. Other tools provide whole-page templates, but I much prefer the section-level templating. It's more convenient to assemble a page this way and add the details on top of that versus taking a finished template and peeling away design and functional elements to get what I want.
Instapage's mobile auto-resizer works better than other platforms I've used. I found that I had many fewer adjustments on their auto-resizing of the full page than I've experienced with other tools. I still had to work with text size a bit, but they generally did a better job of ordering elements for mobile the way I would want and maintain proportionality of page elements better.
Instapage has a lot of integrations that marketers will love. I don't know if they particularly stand out in this respect, but this is a particularly important aspect of their tool that most marketers will care about.
This is something a lot of testing tools struggle with, but I think the WYSIWYG ("What you see is what you get") editor - or Visual Experience Composer (VEC) in Adobe terminology - could definitely use some work. It's a struggle to execute many tests beyond simple copy, color, placement changes, and even the features that do exist are often clunky if not altogether broken.
The interface itself can be a bit counterintuitive in certain parts. If you are familiar with other tools, it's likely middle of the road in this respect; think much easier to understand than Monetate for instance, but a far cry from the simplicity of an Optimizely.
It can be a bit buggy from time to time. The worst example is the frequency at which the tool will fail to save due to an error, but not inform you of this until you try to save, at which point your only option is to log out, log back in, and make all of your updates once again. It can become an extreme pain point at times, and I personally have just gotten into the habit of saving every couple of minutes to avoid a massive loss of productivity.
There are only a couple of minor issues that I dislike. One is offering a Drupal community-approved update to their module. We are using a slightly older version of Drupal and it appears they don't have plans to offer a Drupal-approved update to their module for that version.
There are also random bugs when trying to format text. For example, sometimes a sans serif font appears as a serif and doesn't seem to want to change.
If you work with a template and some code, it can be challenging to edit the default coding.
The built-in forms can be a bit limiting.
The program will try to automatically reformat for mobile, but it may not always be exactly the way you want it to look, so there is a bit of redesigning required when going to mobile.
We have a team of people trained on how to use the application and it integrates well with the other Adobe products we use. Our future roadmap of testing will require some complex scenarios which we hope Target will be able to accomplish
The recent UI update is a complete mess. It is difficult to navigate and find features that previously existed. The reactiveness of the page depending on window size is also ridiculous and it is absurd that depending on how large your window is, entire columns of functions will disappear with no indication that they are missing. The usability of the tool has fallen off a cliff.
I've tried all of the other landing page services on the market, and this is literally the easiest to use. I am not a designer or software developer, just a simple guy and if I can learn how to use it, anyone can. That's what won me over. Their support and pre-made templates are awesome, but the usability is what I love!
On several occasions, we have had the need to ask for help from the Adobe Target support team, and I must say that they have provided us with an excellent experience, as they take care of solving the problems quickly and with high precision
The instructor that came to train us was awesome and this training was very useful. I would recommend it for anyone who is going to be using this software. I only mark it lower because it is an added expense to an already expensive product, and a lot of the training covered the "Target" portion of the software (which again, we didn't use)
The training was very easy to understand, however it would have been more useful to my development team than me. It was also primarily over-the-phone, which is never as easy to follow as in-person. We ended up scheduling and paying for an in-person training session to supplement the online/phone training because it wasn't helpful enough.
Implement using a global mBox on the page so you can change any and everything over the traditional method. Traditional method is good if you do not have technical web dev resources, do not know Javascript/jQuery, or you have money to blow on mBox calls. Global deployment reduces mBox calls and allows you to touch many parts of the page easily. A lot more customizable
We seriously considered another software but because we use so many other Adobe products this made the most sense for us. If you are not dependent on other Adobe software and are a smaller company, in my opinion, Target may not be the best fit.
HubSpot was terrible because it required a lot of coding experience if you wanted to work outside the given 4-5 templates. If you wanted a new template built, or to rebrand existing templates, they charged you. Very inflexible program and was very challenged by it. Our main website was built using WordPress, which is great for building webpages, but more difficult to build a landing page without the distraction of the top navigation menu. Instapage literally answered all the problems we were seeking to address: simplicity, customization, ease of use.
We have been able to run specific A/B tests that have shown an increase in conversion, which in turn has led to very large banked sales numbers for the year.
We have been able to prove that using and automated Merchandising process did not decrease conversion. This allowed us to greatly increase efficiency by opening up resource time.
We've not had much of a conversion rate on some of our landing pages -- but this could be because we are relatively green with the marketing side of things and forget to send people to it. It's not easy for people to find on their own -- so I highly recommend you use some of the "hidden" SEO tools to increase the ROI. Without it, you're not going to be happy with your investment.