Raw Log Files versus Log analyzer by WebTrends

[marthrock]

Hi everyone, I am stuck and really need to figure out what the hell is going on here. I have a web marketing company that we are doing some business with and we never agree on the data. I have been using webtrends old and new versions of log analyzer and they use site meter??? and lately our log files to analyze traffic, however there is quite a difference in data.

Here is an example from this past saturday:

Their data:

05/08/04
Visits 513
Duplicate IP's 133
Unique Visits 380
% Non-Duplicates 74%
Orders 56
Conversion Rate 15%

Our data:

Visits: 986
Duplicate IP's: 35 (visitors who visited more than once???)
Uniques: 915
Orders 56
Conversion rate 6.12%

As you can see, we really need to find out which data is accurate, If webtrends is giving me this data and i really should trust the raw log files, then I just wasted a whole lotta money on webtrends...however if i should trust webtrends and not theirs, then perhaps someone is viewing ones work through rose colored glasses???

perplexed in pitt.

[marthrock]

I just found out they use Sitemeter to analyze the traffic and not our logs.... so its webtrends vs. sitemeter

[John Scott]

Webtrends is the better script. But if you're using different scripts, you'll always seen discrepancies.

For example, AWstats vs Webalizer:
www.internet-marketing-research.net/ archived/ptopic6328.html

Also, on BlueFind.com we have Webalizer, AWstats, and Urchin, and they aren't even close to each other. Urchin seems to be the most accurate.

Our data:

Visits: 986
Duplicate IP's: 35 (visitors who visited more than once???)
Uniques: 915
Orders 56
Conversion rate 6.12%

That sounds like the more accurate.

[marthrock]

This might be a dumb follow up but why do you run three different scripts to analyze the traffic/ is it because you get a certain stat that one of the others does not provide which in turn is critical to the success of the site?

also here is our esteemed mktg. co.'s explanation, does this make sense?

"Web Trends looks at the web logs. Site Meter uses a Java script to
send data to Site Meter when a visitor enters the site. It appears to
me that the "Home Page Visits" number in Web Trends (496) compares with
the # of visits from Site Meter (513). The most logical way for a
visitor to enter the site is through the Home page. So, it makes sense
this would reflect the number of visits"

[greg]

the reason you run miltiple scripts is because each has a strength.

AWstats is great at analyzing SE traffic, it breaks everythign down good, and returns more accurate results. Webalizer seems to be more accurate on the raw traffic side. I have never used Urchin so I have no clue what is good with it

[88sahara]

Peronsally I use a program that allows me to cookie each user that comes to the site, therefore it helps me have more confidence in the results I report to clients.

[wysistat.com]

Originally Posted by JohnScott

Webtrends is the better script. But if you're using different scripts, you'll always seen discrepancies.

On which features do you make this affirmation?
Did you try the competition?

Regards,
Ludovic

[justinjoylife]

Originally Posted by 88sahara

Peronsally I use a program that allows me to cookie each user that comes to the site, therefore it helps me have more confidence in the results I report to clients.

hi,

what program do you use for this?

[88sahara]

nettracker.