Dynamic Yield vs. OpenText Optimost

It's ideal for testing continuous improvements in user experience - we're achieving good results from A/B testing and multivariate testing, and tracking the impact is very slick and compelling. We currently don't have any Dynamic Yield integrations set up for our app due to the complexities involved. We are also unable to track user behavior on platforms nested outside our domain (such as CTAs on our site that link to external booking engines).

Incentivized

The ease of implementation combined with the managed services result in a tool that virtually anyone can use - implementation is less than 10 lines of code added to the relevant pages of the website (we simply added it to our master page template to have it available on any page) and from there the customer can be as involved or not involved as they wish. At BSI we are very hands on with the testing programme - usually developing and designing the tests ourselves and having HP build them, but if we wanted to HP to develop, design and build and limit our role to QA and review that is an option.

• Product recommendations are easy to set up, and powerfully personalizable through either hands on refining or automated A/B testing
• Customer insights are easy to set up and can be applied retroactively to data
• A/B testing anything from different graphics to copy to page layouts is easy to set up and implement site wide

Incentivized

• Because it is a managed service the need for intervention by our internal IT group was removed. This allowed us to control the pace of the testing programme without being influenced by IT resource allocation
• The client and technical account managers are very good at suggesting tests or potential improvements
• HP regularly holds custom forums which are always informative and provide an opportunity to learn from and network with peers and industry leaders

• The impact (either positive or negative) of potentially overlapping campaigns, especially the UX personalization or custom code campaigns, may not be easily identifiable.
• It would make more sense for the new deep-learning and machine learning (ML) driven strategies be made part of the standard offering, as opposed to positioning them as add-on subscription, given that many other completing services are baking in ML as part of their platform evolution.
• The documentation on the API and custom code implementation can be fleshed out further.

• The dashboard interface is difficult to navigate, but I understand that they are currently developing/testing a new much more user friendly interface
• The cost can be a barrier for some organisations, but for us it is worth it. Also they are in the process of releasing a less expensive self authoring testing tool.

implementation took a long time but also, DY has really proven that they are transforming and adapting their platform to be more user friendly and the right technology choice for their brand or company

Incentivized

We have not only renewed our subscription three years running, but we have added the self authoring tool and are looking to expand the subscription so that we can take advantage of the managed services on a global level.

Overall, the interface is not difficult to understand. Although to create campaigns or define strategies for recommendations, some study is required.

Also, some reports are hidden, you really need to know where to look in order to see them (e.g. strategies performance or email campaigns performance).

Also, there is a lack of context help that would improve a lot the usability, especially when you face a feature or a report for the first time.

Incentivized

Allison Schwartz, Customer Success Manager at Dynamic Yield has been nothing less than amazing and stellar! She really sets the standard for customer success and support. Their technical support is fast and reliable, and their educational resources are top of the line

Incentivized

We selected Dynamic Yield because of Better Support & Partnership Experience, Superior Experimentation Capabilities, All-in-One Platform for Personalization, Testing, and Targeting Its better suited then other tools with A/B testing, better hyper personalization, AI - driven capabilities, low - code, better support

Incentivized

We evaluated Optimost again Adobe's similar offering (Target). The big difference between the two and the reason why BSI choose Autonomy was the managed service aspect. The idea that once the code was deployed on the site IT no longer had to be involved gave my team full ownership of the testing programme. With the Adobe product, the involvement of the internal IT group would have been required to launch each test - and this would have decreased the number of tests we could run each month. Back in the day I also used offermatica/omniture and this too required IT involvement.

• Dynamic Yield supports us in our CRO offering as our optimisation platform of choice - we are leveraging this tool heavily in the application of these services - allowing us an ongoing income stream.
• Dynamic Yields adds value to our clients - we can confidently recommend DY's recommendations and AI as better than those that are offered "out of the box" within Shopify. As a Shopify Plus agency, leveraging this better technology is often a quick way in which we can show almost immediate value to new clients to improve their conversion rate and revenue per user.

Incentivized

• Use HP Optimost was the primary driver behind a 40% increase in UK classroom training courses booked online read more details here: http://www.autonomy.com/work/news/details/hsx6767d
• HP Optimost testing led to a 9% increase in sales by improving the BSI Shop's checkout funnel in 2012
• HP Optimost is integral to the success of BSI's continuous improvement testing programme