Adobe Target vs. Optimizely Feature Experimentation

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Adobe Target
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
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
Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Score 8.3 out of 10
N/A
Optimizely Feature Experimentation unites feature flagging, A/B testing, and built-in collaboration—so marketers can release, experiment, and optimize with confidence in one platform.N/A
Pricing
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeRequired
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Considered Both Products
Adobe Target
Chose Adobe Target
The best design products. Because you understand what designers needs.
specially FIGMA
Chose Adobe Target
This tools are very important to create a new visual experience to Adobe Target.
Chose Adobe Target
We have integration and use cases for both solutions, personalization at Marketo and use cases based on data from adobe analytics
Chose Adobe Target
I still use Optimizely as it helps with project managing. We have been using that for quite sometime and we have recently started using Adobe Target Platform and are testing both of them to see which one would work the best for us. In terms of reporting Adobe Target has been …
Chose Adobe Target
Ease of use, integration with Analytics eliminated any waiting periods. Easier to implement and has more features in one place.
Chose Adobe Target
For us, the decision was very straightforward. We chose to invest in the Adobe stack and utilize tools that are developed to integrate together and complement each other. Ex: Adobe Target 'A4T' integration within Adobe Analytics. Optimizely appears to be a great tool, but …
Chose Adobe Target
Google Optimize - Way better than Adobe, even the free version. It automatically work with Google Analytics, and tracks revenue out of the box. Fantastic. Use this.

Optimizely - As a paid service, this is another good option. Tracks revenue out of the box, good heatmapping, most …
Chose Adobe Target
Previously, we had the opportunity to work with some similar services and to be honest we had a disastrous experience because they were not what we were looking for, but since Adobe Target was implemented it has proven to be a highly professional service for our company.
Chose Adobe Target
In my personal opinion, Optimizely is a clear choice here while Google Optimize is for the low-budget minded decision-makers and Evergage for the COE more geared toward personalization; however, in our case we were already locked into using Target prior to my arrival. I don't …
Chose Adobe Target
I have used Optimizely for A/B testing. Optimizely makes it easier to set up almost any type of testing experiment. Optimizely is also strongly recommended for a limited number of users and when you want to optimize the cost. Optimizely was selected over Adobe Target since the …
Chose Adobe Target
I have not used another product like Adobe Target.
Chose Adobe Target
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.
Chose Adobe Target
Target has far superior functionality, it integrates with Adobe Analytics and is easy to build tests.
Chose Adobe Target
It fits on top of our comprehensive data stack
Chose Adobe Target
Many of the same features, but Adobe Test and Target was much more expensive.
Chose Adobe Target
Usability and implementation is harder with other products than with Test and Target.
Chose Adobe Target
Maxymiser,Monetate,Optimizely
Chose Adobe Target
We have looked at Optimizely but at this point are sticking with Test & Target. We like the integration it has with our Analytics tools such as Ad Hoc and SiteCatalyst. Also, we feel that Adobe has some interesting products that we would like to dig into in the future such as …
Chose Adobe Target
I have used Google Analytics on my personal website but I can't compare it with Test and Target, because Google Analytics is free which will do less than what Adobe Test and Target does.
Chose Adobe Target
While my organization has been using Adobe Test & Target, I have had the chance to evaluate Optimizely, another tool that allows for multivariate testing with a smooth interface. The reason I like to stick with Adobe Test & Target is its ability to interface and interact with …
Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
In previous companies I've used Monetate which is a similar A/B testing kind of feature experimentation engine that is very similar from my memory, but again, back to the point of these new features of the analytics engine and Opal, it kind of cuts it above Monetate from my …
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
I wasn’t part of the team that selected Optimizely, but its integrations with other tools were a big plus for us in making our decision. It was more expensive, however.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
We have not used any other similar tools, we evaluated both Kameleoon and VWO. With the combination of price, features, and expandability, we moved forward with Optimizely Feature Experimentation.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Google optimize is great that it is an add on to an existing Analytics implementation, but only has a web version. Optimizely has the SDK so better option for testing new features
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
We selected Optimizely as it was easy to use/understand, had clearly defined SLAs for keeping the platform up and was regarded as resilient within the industry. We needed something at our point in our experimentation journey that could be used for Product testing at scale and …
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Optimizely Feature Experimentation has similar features to Amplitude. As a matter of fact it looks like Amplitude copied Optimizely. However, Amplitude did not mimic the nomenclature issues.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
When Google Optimize goes off we searched for a tool where you can be sure to get a good GA4 implementation and easy to use for IT team and product team.

Optimizely Feature Experimentation seems to have a good balance between pricing and capabilities.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
In other companies, all of the feature flag controls were done locally and it got messy after a while. There was no much control on who was doing what. With Optimizely Feature Experimentation, it is clear what feature flags are enabled and which ones are not. It is easier to …
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
not too much experience on that to answer this question
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
There is a lot more flexibility with Optimizely once you have customized the implementation and better tools.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
WebX and FeatureX work well in pair, they organically complement each other
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Simple interface and ability to create audiences and assign them to experiments.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Optimizely offered both web experimentation (WSYWIG editor for nontechnical marketing folks) and Feature Experimentation. That made the decision easier to get max value across different stakeholder groups.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Optimizely FX is the only tool I've used that specifically allows for testing in the back-end. Most front end tools are great for simple tests, but there comes a time when you need to go a level deeper and that's not possible with front-end tools.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Mixpanel, Google Analytics, Hotjar and A/B Smartly
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
With the Netspring acquisition I think it's closer to its competitor's features
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
I prefer Optimizely Feature Experimentation to web experimentation. I think it's more straightforward to set up and as an engineer, I like being able to have more control from the code side.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
we wanted a shift with the tool that helps us with managing our data
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
We haven't evaluated other products. We have an in-house product that is missing a lot of features and is very behind from making the test process easier.

Instead of evolving our in-house product with limited resources, we decided to go with Optimizely Feature Experimentation …
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Overall, Optimizely Feature Experimentation is an industry leader in terms of experimentation across web and mobile. For apps I would say amplitude does slightly a better job as it is tailored to that niche.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Optimizely Feature Experimentation is better for building more complex experiments than Optimizely Web. However, Optimizely Web is much easier to kickstart your experimentation program with as the learning curve is much lower, and dedicated developer resources are not always …
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Optimizely Feature Experimentation is less of a point solution than LaunchDarkly, so LD has a few extra features, but Optimizely offers a much greater solution for experimentation, personalization etc.
Chose Optimizely Feature Experimentation
Feature experimentation is much more robust and allows more granular control over the decisions you want to make. While Optimizely Feature Experimentation is nice and can be delivered via Optimizely Feature Experimentation's UI, its still not ideal because its brittle and can …
Features
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Testing and Experimentation
Comparison of Testing and Experimentation features of Product A and Product B
Adobe Target
8.0
Ratings
5% below category average
Optimizely Feature Experimentation
-
Ratings
a/b experiment testing9.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Split URL testing8.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Multivariate testing7.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Multi-page/funnel testing8.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Cross-browser testing8.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Mobile app testing8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Test significance8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Visual / WYSIWYG editor7.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Advanced code editor6.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Page surveys8.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Visitor recordings8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Preview mode8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Test duration calculator8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Experiment scheduler8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Experiment workflow and approval7.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Dynamic experiment activation7.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Client-side tests8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Server-side tests7.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Mutually exclusive tests7.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Audience Segmentation & Targeting
Comparison of Audience Segmentation & Targeting features of Product A and Product B
Adobe Target
8.2
Ratings
7% below category average
Optimizely Feature Experimentation
-
Ratings
Standard visitor segmentation7.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Behavioral visitor segmentation7.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Traffic allocation control8.40 Ratings00 Ratings
Website personalization9.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Results and Analysis
Comparison of Results and Analysis features of Product A and Product B
Adobe Target
8.1
Ratings
7% below category average
Optimizely Feature Experimentation
-
Ratings
Heatmap tool7.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Click analytics7.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Scroll maps8.80 Ratings00 Ratings
Form fill analysis8.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Conversion tracking8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Goal tracking8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Test reporting8.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Results segmentation8.30 Ratings00 Ratings
CSV export8.10 Ratings00 Ratings
Experiments results dashboard7.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Small Businesses
Convert Experiences
Convert Experiences
Score 9.9 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Dynamic Yield
Dynamic Yield
Score 9.0 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
Enterprises
Dynamic Yield
Dynamic Yield
Score 9.0 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.8 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Likelihood to Recommend
8.4
(0 ratings)
8.2
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
6.3
(0 ratings)
4.5
(0 ratings)
Usability
8.1
(0 ratings)
7.6
(0 ratings)
Availability
6.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Performance
8.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
3.5
(0 ratings)
3.6
(0 ratings)
In-Person Training
8.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Online Training
6.1
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
7.2
(0 ratings)
10.0
(0 ratings)
Product Scalability
-
(0 ratings)
5.0
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Adobe TargetOptimizely Feature Experimentation
Likelihood to Recommend
We recommend this application because it allows us to segment and track the traffic of our domain under an analysis of their behavior, ranging from counting the number of clicks they make on a single element to the most complete action within our page in real time.
Read full review
Based on my experience with Optimizely Feature Experimentation, I can highlight several scenarios where it excels and a few where it may be less suitable. Well-suited scenarios: - Multi-Channel product launches - Complex A/B testing and feature flag management - Gradual rollout and risk mitigation Less suited scenarios: - Simple A/B tests (their Web Experimentation product is probably better for that) - Non-technical team usage -
Read full review
Pros
  • Because the software is established there is lots of online help available and most of the bugs have been worked out
  • Adobe has a vast supply of resources if your pockets are deep enough.
  • The dashboard is easy to follow and is getting more user-friendly. You no longer have to be an HTML wizard to implement changes.
Read full review
  • Splitting traffic between variants and enabling you to scale up or down the amount of traffic in each one
  • Giving a standardised report that you can share with a huge number of users
  • Showing a large variety of results/metrics you can then dive into
Read full review
Cons
  • There should be some more clarity around what makes a test significant. While this can be decided by the client themselves, some direction from the tool would be helpful.
  • Also, if there was an easier way to organize campaigns and search for them it would be helpful. Right now there is just a long list of campaigns and you have to rely on search to find a specific campaign. What if you don't know the name of the test?
Read full review
  • Difficult integration if your data is not front end
  • Costly MAU model needs to be based on experiments not on site visits
  • It's not easy to understand how to build an Experiment
  • Onboarding team is more focused on punching through their slides and not focused on your needs or understanding.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
Once you get started with your testing program, you realize that it is necessary to continue. You must keep optimizing in order to remain a vital competitor in today's marketing world. Even if you're not using Test & Target or any other user experience testing software, you ought to be performing comparison tests on your own, simply by routing your audience to different experiences and quantifying the aggregate of the results.
Read full review
Competitive landscape
Read full review
Usability
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.
Read full review
Easy to navigate the UI. Once you know how to use it, it is very easy to run experiments. And when the experiment is setup, the SDK code variables are generated and available for developers to use immediately so they can quickly build the experiment code
Read full review
Reliability and Availability
i don't think we use the full functionalities of the tool, but to use the full functions, it's almost impossible (Too hard)
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Performance
The bottleneck is never the software program
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Support Rating
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
Read full review
Support was there but it was pretty slow at most times. Only after escalation was support really given to our teams
Read full review
In-Person Training
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)
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Online Training
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.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Implementation Rating
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
Read full review
It’s straightforward. Docs are well written and I believe there must be a support. But we haven’t used it
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
For us, the decision was very straightforward. We chose to invest in the Adobe stack and utilize tools that are developed to integrate together and complement each other. Ex: Adobe Target 'A4T' integration within Adobe Analytics. Optimizely appears to be a great tool, but for us aligning with the Adobe suite, ensuring that future product enhancements and tools would work well together was a very important key factor in our decision
Read full review
In previous companies I've used Monetate which is a similar A/B testing kind of feature experimentation engine that is very similar from my memory, but again, back to the point of these new features of the analytics engine and Opal, it kind of cuts it above Monetate from my experience. Obviously Monetate may have improved since when I lost use it, but from what I can see, yeah.
Read full review
Scalability
No answers on this topic
had troubles with performance for SSR and the React SDK
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • This is something we've been working to improve on, as far as how we're calculating and tracking this, but Target has had a substantial ROI on our business.
  • I will say specific to our efforts, we could have probably done similar work if not the same work using a different testing tool (Optimizely for example), but Target has been good for us.
Read full review
  • We have improved various metrics throughout the course of our experimentation program with Optimizely and therefore sharing numbers is tricky. Essentially we only implement versions of the product that perform the best in terms of CVR, revenue/visitor, ATV, average order value, average basket size and so forth dependent on the north star we are trying to move with each release.
Read full review
ScreenShots

Optimizely Feature Experimentation Screenshots

Screenshot of Feature Flag Setup. Here users can run A/B and multi-armed bandit tests, as well as:

- Set up a single feature flag to test multiple variations and experiment types
- Enable targeted deliveries and rollouts for more precise experimentation
- Roll back changes quickly when needed to ensure experiment accuracy and reduce risks
- Increase testing flexibility with control over experiment types and delivery methodsScreenshot of Audience Setup. This is used to target specific user segments for personalized experiments, and:

- Create and customize audiences based on user attributes
- Refine audience segments to ensure the right users are included in tests
- Enhance experiment relevance by setting specific conditions for user groupsScreenshot of Experiment Results, supporting the analysis and optimization of experimentation outcomes. Viewers can also:

- examine detailed experiment results, including key metrics like conversion rates and statistical significance
- Compare variations side-by-side to identify winning treatments
- Use advanced filters to segment and drill down into specific audience or test dataScreenshot of A Program Overview. These offer insights into any experimentation program’s performance. It also offers:

- A comprehensive view of the entire experimentation program’s status and progress
- Monitoring for key performance metrics like test velocity, success rates, and overall impact
- Evaluation of the impact of experiments with easy-to-read visualizations and reporting tools
- Performance tracking of experiments over time to guide decision-making and optimize strategiesScreenshot of AI Variable Suggestions. These enhance experimentation with AI-driven insights, and can also help with:

- Generating multiple content variations with AI to speed up experiment design
- Improving test quality with content suggestions
- Increasing experimentation velocity and achieving better outcomes with AI-powered optimizationScreenshot of Schedule Changes, to streamline experimentation. Users can also:

- Set specific times to toggle flags or rules on/off, ensuring precise control
- Schedule traffic allocation percentages for smooth experiment rollouts
- Increase test velocity and confidence by automating progressive changes