AB Tasty

Name: AB Tasty
Brand: AB Tasty

Your customer experience optimization partner.

Est 2009|Valuation $150M|Raised $98.8M|52 Ref Customers

LinkedIn 30K|Web traffic 151K|FTEs 299|HQ Paris, Île-de-France, FR

MarketsConversion Rate Optimization (CRO) & A/B Testing A/B Testing & Experimentation

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

#### Optimizely vs AB Tasty (two-sided marketing claims) - Optimizely positions itself as stronger in experimentation sophistication and governance and highlights differences on latency, scale, and QA. - AB Tasty emphasizes ease-of-use, datalayer-based targeting, and suite breadth in its materials. Buyer takeaway: the choice often hinges on governance and statistical rigor versus ease-of-use, targeting, and suite breadth, and the organization’s tolerance for client-side performance overhead. #### Market consolidation impact (recent) Recent consolidation activity in the DXO market indicates movement toward larger suites with more integrated capabilities. Potential impacts include: - Product roadmap reprioritization - Packaging and pricing changes - Support and organizational restructuring Procurement considerations for organizations evaluating in the current market: - Request written commitments for product support timelines - Confirm data portability and export capabilities - Clarify SLA and support model continuity

	AB Tasty	Optimizely	VWO (Wingify)
Starting Price	Sales-led / not consistently public for core platform	Sales-led / not consistently public	Sales-led / not consistently public
Best For	Teams wanting a combined suite: experimentation + personalization + recommendations, with targeting and a visual editor	Organizations prioritizing experimentation governance, advanced stats tooling, and potential edge delivery	Teams focused on CRO experimentation tooling; strategically relevant given recent consolidation dynamics
Key Strength	Targeting/segmentation and usability frequently reported in reviews	Experimentation rigor / stats and enterprise maturity	DXO heritage and broad CRO focus; strategically relevant in the current market context
Key Weakness	QA/mobile friction, WYSIWYG/editor limitations, potential performance overhead for heavy client-side changes	Perceived as more complex/technical and may be costly; may be excessive for smaller teams	Vendor-specific limitations vary; buyers should validate stats approach, governance, and SPA workflows

01Competitive Landscape

Narrative analysis

Optimizely vs AB Tasty (two-sided marketing claims)

Optimizely positions itself as stronger in experimentation sophistication and governance and highlights differences on latency, scale, and QA.
AB Tasty emphasizes ease-of-use, datalayer-based targeting, and suite breadth in its materials.

Buyer takeaway: the choice often hinges on governance and statistical rigor versus ease-of-use, targeting, and suite breadth, and the organization’s tolerance for client-side performance overhead.

Market consolidation impact (recent)

Recent consolidation activity in the DXO market indicates movement toward larger suites with more integrated capabilities. Potential impacts include:

Product roadmap reprioritization
Packaging and pricing changes
Support and organizational restructuring

Procurement considerations for organizations evaluating in the current market:

Request written commitments for product support timelines
Confirm data portability and export capabilities
Clarify SLA and support model continuity

	AB Tasty	Optimizely	VWO (Wingify)
Starting Price	Sales-led / not consistently public for core platform	Sales-led / not consistently public	Sales-led / not consistently public
Best For	Teams wanting a combined suite: experimentation + personalization + recommendations, with targeting and a visual editor	Organizations prioritizing experimentation governance, advanced stats tooling, and potential edge delivery	Teams focused on CRO experimentation tooling; strategically relevant given recent consolidation dynamics
Key Strength	Targeting/segmentation and usability frequently reported in reviews	Experimentation rigor / stats and enterprise maturity	DXO heritage and broad CRO focus; strategically relevant in the current market context
Key Weakness	QA/mobile friction, WYSIWYG/editor limitations, potential performance overhead for heavy client-side changes	Perceived as more complex/technical and may be costly; may be excessive for smaller teams	Vendor-specific limitations vary; buyers should validate stats approach, governance, and SPA workflows