Dexi.io with Mozenda vs. FluidSurveys (Discontinued)

The Mozenda platform is well suited to some specific scenarios that may work well for your organization. It is especially helpful for basic scraping of information from simple websites. If the information you need to obtain is clearly stated on a website, then Mozenda is a simple solution to capture that data quickly and easily.

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

For surveys, and for centralized info-gathering, FluidSurveys provides an excellent solution. There are other programs out there which provide a wider range of solutions (i.e., they can be used for surveying AND comprehensive online engagement, rather than just a data-gathering type of consultation); however, for programming and implementing surveys, FluidSurveys has an effective variety of strengths and options that make it optimal for users who are focused specifically on surveys.

• Action Items. Mozenda is broken down into a series of actions that can be performed on a page. Some actions take you to other pages. The action list, while short, provides a comprehensive set of tools for scraping just about any website (I haven't met one where it didn't work yet).
• Error Handling. I've used some scraping tools that have virtually no error handling. Mozenda has great error handling; the software almost always pinpoints the exact action where the agent failed and why.
• Speed. Mozenda is very fast at obtaining results. Other "bot" software can be slow and cumbersome but Mozenda plows through pages rapidly and accurately aggregates information.
• XPath compatibility. One of the most powerful features of Mozenda is the integrated ability to use XPaths to get at the exact bits of information we're after on a particular website. Access to visible information is only limited by imagination.

• User-friendly. For the majority of the general and basic tools you can use with FluidSurveys to build surveys are simple to use and intuitive. When certain issues come up, the service is quick (chat room) and effective.
• Anonymity: the software has the reputation of being safer in terms of safeguarding private information the respondents share by answering surveys (this is mainly due to the fact that the servers are in Canada). Thus, indirectly, they increase response rates.
• Extensive possibilities: FluidSurveys offers a plethora of possibilities and options that really renders the experience interesting in terms of micro-managing each details of the surveys you are sending out there. When the invitation leaves by email, it is exactly how you want it.

• The user interface for managing agents can be improved
• When websites change, the agents could be better at dynamically updating
• The "credit" usage can be confusing

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• There should be more flexibility and customizability with regard to survey design (e.g. background, fonts...)

Note: I am responding to this question as a user of the system and not a representative of my organization.

On a personal level/as a user only, I would definitely continue to use FluidSurveys.On a personal level/as a user only, I would definitely continue to use FluidSurveys.

I think the average person can very quickly pick up on the basics of the system: they would have no problems programming and launching a basic survey. Organizations may benefit from having people of different backgrounds getting their hands dirty in the system: at a minimum, both web programmers and opinion research advisors should be solicited for input or help.

I'm only personally experienced with UBot Studio and Scrapy. UBot Studio isn't a bad application, though it has quite a large number of bugs when compared to Mozenda. UBot touts itself as low-code, but requires a significant understanding of programming logic to use the program effectively. Using UBot, we were able to get virtually all the results we wanted, but at a much higher labor cost than Mozenda. During initial implementation of UBot, it took me a full week to develop a particularly complicated agent. Using Mozenda, I was able to recreate the same agent in 4 hours. The ROI has been remarkable, and Mozenda really is a low-code platform.

Although I do not have much experience with Survey Monkey, the only two reasons why I choose FluidSurveys is that clients demand it (privacy and anonymity) and because managing multiple surveys at a time is easier. As for ODK Collect, I think it is a valuable alternative to FluidSurveys if you have time to learn the coding (not very complicated). ODK is a little less user friendly and you cannot address small details as you can with FluidSurveys (e.g.: formatting).

• Stay relevant in the market
• Ensure product placement against competitors
• Dramatically enhance profitability

Incentivized

Independently Invited by TrustRadius

A de minimis incentive was given to thank the reviewer for their time. The incentive was not used to bias or drive a particular response, nor was the incentive contingent on a positive endorsement. More Info

• Confidentiality of data is a big concern for our company, and we feel more secure working with a Canadian company. Our clients feel more secure, too.