1. Advertising
    y u no do it?

    Advertising (learn more)

    Advertise virtually anything here, with CPM banner ads, CPM email ads and CPC contextual links. You can target relevant areas of the site and show ads based on geographical location of the user if you wish.

    Starts at just $1 per CPM or $0.10 per CPC.

Analytics Vs Awstat

Discussion in 'Search Engine Optimization' started by silveraden, Aug 23, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. #1
    Analytics is too inaccurate compared to awstat. GA displays just 70% of my actual traffic...

    Have you tried comparing your stats too?
     
    silveraden, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  2. irunbackwards

    irunbackwards Peon

    Messages:
    791
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #2
    awstats is more inaccurate when compared against analytics statistics.
     
    irunbackwards, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  3. schgrv

    schgrv Active Member

    Messages:
    677
    Likes Received:
    9
    Best Answers:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    68
    #3
    Google analytics also not too accurate but features and options provided by it outstanding. You cud go in very deep analysis to measure your site performance. That's why i prefer analytics.........................
     
    schgrv, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  4. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,927
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #4
    Awstats shows more inaccurate data; not to mention most people can't read it properly anyways. Google Analytics is by far the best, especially when placed right "below" your <body> tag; helps get those quick bouncers.
     
    astup1didiot, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  5. mooseweb

    mooseweb Banned

    Messages:
    1,154
    Likes Received:
    17
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #5
    Analytics are amazing, they are by the absolute best. Especially with all the extra features, minor miscalculations are nothing.
     
    mooseweb, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  6. himoacs

    himoacs Peon

    Messages:
    717
    Likes Received:
    11
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #6
    I have not tired awstats yet but I am really happy with GOogle Analytics and its features. It's simple and easy to use.
     
    himoacs, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  7. Brandon Sheley

    Brandon Sheley Illustrious Member

    Messages:
    9,720
    Likes Received:
    611
    Best Answers:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    420
    #7
    both are ok and have their place, as well as sites like quantcast and woopra
    I suggest using analytics, quantcast and woopra to track your site
     
    Brandon Sheley, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  8. silveraden

    silveraden Banned

    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    109
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #8
    How could you say awstat is more inaccurate when it shows server logs? GA does not record my traffic from south america whereas awstat and addfreestat records them..
     
    silveraden, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  9. tendulkar2

    tendulkar2 Banned

    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    69
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #9
    I use both and I didn't find any big difference between them.. I also use Alexa graph to see whether my site is improving or not.
     
    tendulkar2, Aug 23, 2008 IP
  10. silveraden

    silveraden Banned

    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    109
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #10
    Alexa and awstat give pretty close result but analytics really far...
     
    silveraden, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  11. lakelandprinting

    lakelandprinting Peon

    Messages:
    699
    Likes Received:
    13
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #11
    Awstats tells me I get 500 uniques a day on a site I have. Analytics tells me I get 250, and so doesn't BLVD Status. Webilizer tells me I get about 900.

    If you like live real time stats, check out the BLVD
     
    lakelandprinting, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  12. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,927
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #12
    Alexa? You do realize it's probably one of the worst estimates you can get. Plus, yes awstat reads server logs... that doesn't mean it reads them accurately... it doesn't take into account a lot of "non-human" traffic.
     
    astup1didiot, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  13. abercrombie

    abercrombie Peon

    Messages:
    654
    Likes Received:
    11
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #13
    i like analytics since it's portable. if i were to switch hosts, or simply rename a subdomain folder then awstats start all over again.
     
    abercrombie, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  14. silveraden

    silveraden Banned

    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    109
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #14
    I am not saying I am relying solely on alexa... I am just referring to the progress it recorded..

    Alexa, Awstat, addfree stat have the same pretty close results... GA is half way behind... do you think I would believe in one against 3?
     
    silveraden, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  15. Aryans

    Aryans Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,853
    Likes Received:
    31
    Best Answers:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    178
    #15
    analytics is showing accurate result compare to Awstats. and yes agree ssandecki's Alexa ranking just worst estimates.
     
    Aryans, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  16. silveraden

    silveraden Banned

    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    109
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #16
    Explain to me why GA is more accurate than Awstat.!
    Provide evidence, source of traffic, etc... to end this argument and I will provide mine... don't post non-sense if you just want to ride with the conversation...
     
    silveraden, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  17. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,927
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #17
    Log files will always give you a higher number of page views, visits, and unique visitors when compared to a web-based javascript solution like Google Analytics, and in most cases the high numbers are too high.

    Web-based solutions give you a better picture of the visits your website receives and report numbers usually a lot lower (but presumably more accurate) than log files. The tradeoff is that users with high security settings may only be partially tracked or not tracked at all and that file downloads are difficult to monitor.
     
    astup1didiot, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  18. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,927
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #18
    This thread should of been named "Log Files vs Javascript Analytics Tracking"
     
    astup1didiot, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  19. silveraden

    silveraden Banned

    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    109
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    #19
    My awstat and addfreestat have the same result abd GA is too far.. addfreestat is also a web based solution... I am adding another web based solution to settle this issue..
     
    silveraden, Aug 24, 2008 IP
  20. astup1didiot

    astup1didiot Notable Member

    Messages:
    5,927
    Likes Received:
    269
    Best Answers:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    280
    #20
    They would have the same results, they are using the same web logs :D You should use something like statcounter or something if you wanna see the difference, the issue with log file analytics is it tends to "over shoot", in theory you'd rather have the most accurate, and technically mathamatically speaking less than the whole number is closer than being over all together. ;)

    Never the less, I use Google Analytics; will suggest it when this same question comes up due to my experience with it and log file analytics programs.
     
    astup1didiot, Aug 24, 2008 IP
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.