Does Google Analytics Work?

I have been using Google Analytics to track my traffic, but I was not sure if it was working right, so I tried using StatCounter.com to compare results.

I checked both, after a few days, and the StatCounter is showing more hits and unique visitors, alot more than Google Analtics is showing.

For Example, last nights UV's according to each:

GA: 69
SC: 129

So which one should I trust? I know most would say go with whatever one says more, but I want to know for sure how many hits I am getting.

 

both unique user´s ?

 

Hello
The only disadvantage about Google analytics is the delay in receiving data. otherwise, is much better than SC. the difference in hits ur getting might be from automatic queries being sent to ur website.

 

Google Analytics works fairly good. StatCounter always shows more visitors, not sure why.
But the difference is tiny for me, so who cares...

 

It would be interesting to know, but as someone mentioned the difference may be due to the spiders that google filters out and statcounter may not.

 

it needs to hit bottom of the page to load javascript. If your user bounce before page is fully loaded then it doesnt work

 

It is great program when used with PPC spending in AdWords. The other big disadvantage is Google owns your data.

 

if javascript isnt enabled in a browser then these sites cant track the visits thats a disadvantage i guess

 

this is the same complaint of awstats vs. Google Analytics if you do a search for awstats and google analytics. the main reasoning seems to be that awstats includes the various bots while GA does not include bot traffic. also, the java enabled thing can be another reason though very small percentage - my stats show only 1.42% have java disabled.

 

I use webstat which is free and useful But Google analytics are even better IMHO

 

Google Analytics is working well for me, however Stat Counter showing more visitors... and the only disadvantage is the updating delay...

 

For my sites Analytics always shows less visitors than AWStats for example, even when robots are filtered out.

 

Google Analytics can track conversions that Statcounter couldn't do. So if your site is business related ie. your selling something and using fill-out forms, then better use it. If not, SC is a good choice.

With regards to the different results given by these tracking systems, Here's the reason why SC always has more results than GA:
Statcounter can track visitors whether it's javascript enabled or not while
Google Analytics can only track visitors that are javascript enabled.

sources:
http://www.statcounter.com/features/#javascript-stats
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Analytics

 

Google Analytics is another great tool to help us all. I use it almost everyday, besides Ad Manager.

 

I would imagine Analytics can only track people who have cookies and javascript enabled in thier browsers but that's probably more than 80% of everyone on the whole web

 

Don't forget to optimize your keywords if you are relying upon Google Analytics. If you do it correctly, you can gain more traffic coming to your site.

Thank you Google!

 

I like the ease of use and set up of google analytics. I can cope with the minor disadvantages that have been mentioned regarding java and the time lag.

 

I have used numerous stat trackers and everyone seems to provide differing counts for traffic. Analytics offers features for me that are far more valuable, like goal setting and the funnel visualization.

I am in real estate and in this world it is necessary to be able to track your visitors as they approach your target pages and find out where they are jumping off. Analytics does this quite nicely and at the right price. Free!

 

my choice statcounter,

 

for me use Google analytics. try to stick to them there are lot of tool out there use for checking but you think they are effective. Using Google Analytics you are sure the result came from Google and the result came from them.