Tools and providers
Part of Selecting conversion suppliers by one store job, one dossier and independent risk gates
No conversion tool makes the shortlist yet, and the supplier evidence that would change that
See why the current England conversion-tool shortlist is empty and what exact supplier evidence and controlled buyer tests would change that hold.
What to take away
- No conversion tool is recommended today. None of the seven candidates combines a current exact-edition dossier with one common controlled buyer test for a defined England merchant job.
- The candidates are Optimizely Web Experimentation, VWO, AB Tasty, Adobe Target, Contentsquare, Microsoft Clarity and Matomo. All are held, none is admitted, and none is ranked for quality.
- Only VWO, Matomo and Clarity publish any price. Optimizely, AB Tasty, Adobe Target and Contentsquare quote only, so their terms arrive after a sales conversation.
- A feature page is not evidence for your configured checkout. Ask first for event definitions, missingness and a correction route.
- Until the record is current, keep the manual route and leave price, service levels and thresholds blank.
The seven candidates, tiered by what is already public
These tiers record how much of an admission record is public, not which product is better. Choosing between them starts with one defined merchant job, as the order-state costing guide sets out.
Indicative prices, as published or quoted in 2026, exclude implementation and support.
| Tool | Main job | Indicative price or limit (2026) | Tier |
|---|---|---|---|
| Matomo | Product analytics, self-hosted or cloud | Self-hosted free; cloud indicative from about £15 to £25 a month at low-traffic tiers | 1 |
| Microsoft Clarity | Session replay, heatmaps and click tracking | Free | 1 |
| VWO (Wingify) | A/B testing, personalisation and analytics | Free tier limited; paid self-serve indicative from about £200 to £300 a month | 1 |
| Optimizely Web Experimentation | Server-side and client-side testing, feature flags and allocation | Quote only; no public list price | 2 |
| AB Tasty | Experimentation and personalisation for ecommerce teams | Quote only; enterprise contracts | 2 |
| Adobe Target | Testing and personalisation inside Adobe Experience Cloud | Quote only; usually bought with other Adobe products | 2 |
| Contentsquare | Journey analytics, session replay and experience monitoring | Quote only; large-merchant contracts | 2 |
Tier 1 means a public price and a public edition description exist, so the gap left is configured evidence. Tier 2 means nothing can be compared until terms are released. Neither tier is a recommendation.
What a supplier must supply
Work through this record in order. A missing item is a reason to stop, not a reason to estimate.
- Name the legal contracting entity, the exact edition, eligibility rules and UK availability. Companies House corroborates registered facts, but registration is not endorsement.
- State one merchant job with its inputs, outputs, expected states and exclusions.
- List every cookie, script and device operation, with purpose, role, lawful basis and transparency.
- Attach security evidence to the real integration, covering offshoring, incidents and subprocessors.
- Show accessibility results on the configured pages and customer tasks.
- Prove export, restore, deletion and rollback in the assessed edition, and give a correction route when records disagree.
Candidate admission record
- Legal entity, edition and UK availability
- One defined merchant job and expected states
- Inputs, outputs, event definitions and exclusions
- Missingness and change history for edition
- Every cookie, script, device operation and data flow
- Security evidence fitted to actual integration
The record doubles as a contract question, and the supplier contract checklist covers what to demand before anyone signs.
UK rules that set the evidence bar
Any script or cookie that reads a shopper's device needs a PECR basis, and the ICO's guidance on storage and access technologies is the starting point. Purpose, retention, recipients and deletion need answers before a pilot.
The NCSC's supplier assurance questions cover governance, incidents, networks and data. A trust badge is recorded with issuer, subject, scope, validity and exclusions, never accepted by name.
W3C WAI states in its evaluation guidance that no tool alone decides whether a site meets accessibility standards. Automated scores cannot replace review of your checkout pages.
The CMA's price transparency guidance and the Consumer Rights Act 2015 govern what pre-contract information your checkout must keep visible. A testing tool must not hide mandatory charges.
Example: a controlled buyer test for one checkout job
Job: does removing the optional phone field change completion without breaking address validation? Expected states are order completed, abandonment at the payment step, address validation error, consent recorded and consent withheld.
Control and candidate must map those five states identically on the same traffic slice. The review compares tool events with store and payment records and lists each disagreement. Independent privacy and accessibility checks come before wider use.
Where a supplier proposes automated optimisation, the review of AI applications explains where a human still owns the decision. Rollback is tested on day one.
Common questions
Is any tool recommended today?
No. No candidate has both a current exact-edition dossier and a common controlled buyer test, so naming a best pick would mean inventing terms, configuration and merchant needs.
Which candidates are closest to a comparison?
Matomo, Clarity and VWO, only because they publish a price and an edition description. That makes them easier to assess, not better suited to your store.
What would put a tool on the shortlist?
A full dossier plus one controlled buyer test with identical job definitions on both routes, predeclared acceptance cases and authorised or synthetic data. Export, restore and deletion must work in the assessed edition.
What if the supplier changes its terms?
A material change to terms, subprocessors, interfaces or definitions reopens admission instead of inheriting the earlier decision, so the monitoring duty needs an owner.
