10 Tools That Increase Landing Page Conversion Rates (2026)

The short version:

• Companies spend $92 driving traffic for every $1 spent converting it. The tools below fix the conversion side of the equation.
• The market spans from $0 (Microsoft Clarity) to $500K+/year (Optimizely enterprise). Most marketers don't know mid-market options exist.
• Most tools either generate content OR test variants. Only one tool (Foundry) generates content from campaign data AND tests it AND learns autonomously.
• Google Optimize died in September 2023, leaving ~3.5 million websites without free A/B testing. VWO Free is the closest replacement at 50K monthly tracked users.
• Thompson Sampling and multi-armed bandit approaches reach conclusions with 50 to 75% fewer visitors than traditional A/B tests. When you're paying per click, statistical methodology affects your ad budget.
• Only 22% of businesses are satisfied with their conversion rates. 68% have no structured CRO process at all.

Companies spend $92 acquiring a visitor for every $1 they spend converting that visitor. The traffic side gets budgets, headcount, and tooling. The conversion side gets neglected. The CRO software market is valued at $10.4 billion and projected to reach $23.64 billion by 2032, but the average enterprise still runs only 2.1 A/B tests per month despite having licenses for unlimited testing.

This article covers 10 tools that improve landing page conversion rates, spanning four categories: tools that help you understand visitor behavior, tools that build landing pages, tools that test variants, and tools that generate and optimize content autonomously. Each entry includes verified pricing, real features, honest limitations from G2 and Capterra reviews, and who the tool is actually for. The comparison table at the end puts them side by side.

Foundry is #1 on this list. It's our tool. Every other entry is covered with the same depth, same pricing verification, and same honest limitations, including ours.

1. Foundry

Category: Autonomous landing page optimization Starting price: $249/month G2 rating: Early stage (limited reviews) Website: foundrycro.com

Foundry is an autonomous CRO platform that ingests Google Ads campaign data (keywords, headlines, ad copy) via a direct sync, generates landing page copy variations using that campaign context, tests those variations via Thompson Sampling, prunes losers, and regenerates new variants using the failure context. Each generation is informed by what didn't work before, so the system gets smarter over time without human intervention.

Foundry does not build landing pages. It optimizes existing ones. It works from the first anonymous click using campaign intent (UTM parameters, ad data) rather than visitor identity data. No cookies. No data enrichment. No CDP required.

Key features. Eight-layer AI context model for content generation pulling from campaign keywords, ad headlines, page structure, performance history, failure patterns, active challengers, voice of customer data, and site context. Prune-to-learn architecture that removes underperforming variants and regenerates with failure context baked in. Thompson Sampling (Bayesian bandit) that balances exploration and exploitation, allocating traffic dynamically rather than splitting 50/50. Approval workflow where AI generates and a human approves before anything goes live. Google Ads campaign sync that feeds real campaign data into content generation.

Pricing. Growth: $249/month for 15 pages and 5 personalizations. Scale: $499/month for unlimited pages and unlimited personalizations. No per-visitor pricing. No overage charges. No free plan.

Best for. PPC managers and performance marketers running Google Ads traffic to landing pages who want the page to optimize based on what the ads are actually saying, without hiring a CRO specialist or learning A/B testing methodology.

Limitations. Does not build landing pages. Requires an existing page to optimize. Currently focused on Google Ads campaign sync. Other traffic sources use UTM-based optimization only. Newer platform with a smaller market footprint than VWO or Optimizely. No native heatmaps or session recordings (pair with Hotjar or Clarity for behavioral data).

2. VWO

Category: A/B testing and experimentation platform Starting price: Free (50K monthly tracked users) / $299/month (Growth) G2 rating: 4.3/5 (530+ reviews) Website: vwo.com

VWO is a full-stack experimentation platform offering A/B testing, multivariate testing, split URL testing, server-side testing, session recordings, heatmaps, surveys, and funnel analysis. Since Google Optimize shut down, VWO has captured the largest share of the migration market, now running on 9,183 of the top 1 million websites versus Optimizely's 5,353.

Key features. Visual editor and code editor for creating variants. VWO SmartStats (Bayesian statistical engine) that reports results as probability of being best rather than p-values. VWO Copilot (AI assistant) for generating test hypotheses, writing variation copy, and analyzing results. Heatmaps, session recordings, and funnel analysis via VWO Insights (separate pricing). Rule-based and AI-driven personalization via VWO Personalize.

Pricing. Free Starter plan with A/B testing for up to 50K monthly tracked users. Growth: $299/month (billed annually) for A/B, MVT, and targeting. Pro: $599/month (billed annually) adding server-side testing and mutually exclusive campaigns. Enterprise: custom pricing starting around $1,000+/month. VWO Insights (heatmaps, recordings) is a separate product starting at $129/month.

Best for. Marketing teams and CRO specialists who want a comprehensive testing platform with a visual editor, especially those migrating from Google Optimize who want Bayesian statistics and don't need enterprise governance.

Limitations. Visual editor can break complex page layouts, so developers often need custom code. Page flicker on variant load is a persistent complaint, especially on slower sites. Reporting dashboards slow with high-volume tests. Customer support response times inconsistent (multiple reviewers cite 24 to 48 hour delays for non-enterprise accounts). Pricing jumps significantly from Growth to Pro when you need server-side testing.

3. Optimizely

Category: Enterprise experimentation platform Starting price: ~$50,000/year G2 rating: 4.2/5 (650+ reviews) Website: optimizely.com

Optimizely is the original enterprise experimentation platform, now expanded into a full Digital Experience Platform covering web experimentation, feature flags, content management, and commerce. Its experimentation product uses a proprietary frequentist statistical engine (Stats Engine) with sequential testing and false discovery rate controls.

Key features. Web experimentation with A/B, MVT, and multi-page experiments using visual and code editors. Feature experimentation with feature flags, progressive rollouts, and server-side testing across 10+ language SDKs. Opal AI Agents (2025 to 2026) for AI-powered experiment ideation, audience discovery, and results interpretation. Stats Engine with sequential testing that allows peeking at results without inflating false positive rates. Program management with collaboration tools, experiment calendars, and mutual exclusion groups.

Pricing. Web Experimentation: approximately $50,000 to $150,000/year based on traffic volume. Feature Experimentation: approximately $50,000 to $100,000/year based on monthly active users. Full platform (DXP): $200,000 to $500,000+/year including CMS, commerce, and experimentation. No free plan. No self-serve pricing. All plans require annual contracts and sales engagement.

Best for. Enterprise organizations (500+ employees) with dedicated experimentation or growth teams, engineering resources for implementation, and budgets above $50K/year who need governance, feature flags, and multi-product experimentation under one roof.

Limitations. Pricing is prohibitive for anyone below enterprise scale. Implementation typically requires dedicated developer resources with 2 to 4 week setup being common. Visual editor is widely criticized as clunky and unreliable compared to VWO. Results reporting is less intuitive than competitors, and non-technical stakeholders struggle to interpret. Platform complexity leads to underutilization with many organizations using less than 20% of available features. Contract lock-in with aggressive renewal terms is frequently cited in reviews.

4. Unbounce

Category: Landing page builder with AI optimization Starting price: $22/month G2 rating: 4.3/5 (350+ reviews) Website: unbounce.com

Unbounce is a drag-and-drop landing page builder with built-in A/B testing and Smart Traffic, a contextual multi-armed bandit algorithm that automatically routes visitors to the landing page variant most likely to convert based on visitor attributes (device, location, browser). It also offers Dynamic Text Replacement for keyword-level text swapping and Smart Copy for AI-generated headlines and body copy.

Key features. No-code landing page builder with 100+ templates. Smart Traffic that starts routing after 50 visits with an average 30% conversion lift claimed by Unbounce. Smart Copy (AI) for generating headlines, CTAs, and body copy (not campaign-aware). Dynamic Text Replacement that swaps page text based on URL parameters (available on Experiment tier and above). Traditional A/B testing with statistical significance calculator. Popups and sticky bars for lead capture.

Pricing. Starter: $22/month for 1 domain, 20K visitors, no A/B testing. Experiment: $62/month for 2 domains, 30K visitors, A/B testing and DTR. Optimize: $187/month for 3 domains, 50K visitors, Smart Traffic and AI copy. Agency/Enterprise: custom pricing for unlimited domains and visitors. Smart Traffic and AI copy generation require the Optimize tier at $187/month minimum.

Best for. Small-to-mid-size marketing teams running Google Ads or Meta Ads who need to build, test, and optimize landing pages without developer support, especially those who want AI-assisted traffic routing without managing testing manually.

Limitations. Smart Traffic is a black box with no transparency into why visitors are routed to specific variants. Dynamic Text Replacement is basic keyword insertion, not strategic personalization. It swaps text strings from URL parameters only. Page load speed can suffer with complex designs due to JavaScript overhead. Template designs feel dated compared to Instapage. A/B testing is limited to page-level variants only with no element-level multivariate testing. Visitor caps on lower tiers create unexpected overage charges.

5. Instapage

Category: Landing page platform with ad-to-page mapping Starting price: $79/month G2 rating: 4.3/5 (500+ reviews) Website: instapage.com

Instapage is an enterprise-grade landing page platform with a pixel-perfect builder, server-side A/B testing, and AdMap, a feature that maps Google Ads campaigns to specific landing page experiences. Its Thor Render Engine delivers sub-500ms page loads, the fastest in the landing page builder category.

Key features. Advanced drag-and-drop editor with Instablocks (reusable content blocks) for pixel-perfect layouts. AdMap that visualizes which ads connect to which pages and flags gaps, but does not generate or optimize page content. Thor Render Engine with server-side rendering delivering under 0.5 second page load times. Server-side A/B testing on the Optimize tier (no client-side flicker). Built-in heatmap analytics (no separate tool needed). 1:1 ad-to-page personalization for creating unique post-click experiences per ad group.

Pricing. Create: $79/month for the builder, Instablocks, and 15K unique visitors. Optimize: custom pricing (estimated $200 to $400/month) for A/B testing, heatmaps, and AdMap. Convert: custom pricing (estimated $500+/month) for server-side testing, 1:1 personalization, and audit logs. AdMap and server-side A/B testing require the Optimize tier (sales conversation required).

Best for. Performance marketing teams at mid-size to enterprise companies who need pixel-perfect landing pages with fast load times and want to systematically map their Google Ads structure to post-click experiences, but have the resources to manage testing manually.

Limitations. AdMap visualizes campaign-to-page mapping but doesn't generate or optimize content. It's organizational, not autonomous. Pricing is opaque beyond the Create tier, requiring sales conversations for Optimize and Convert. Limited native integrations compared to Unbounce, especially with email platforms and CRMs. Builder can be sluggish with complex pages. No Smart Traffic equivalent. All routing and optimization is manual. Mobile editing is a separate workflow, not responsive by default.

6. Hotjar

Category: Behavioral analytics (heatmaps and session recordings) Starting price: Free / $39/month (Plus) G2 rating: 4.3/5 (300+ reviews) | Capterra: 4.6/5 (500+ reviews) Website: hotjar.com

Hotjar provides heatmaps, session recordings, feedback polls, and surveys to help marketers understand how visitors interact with landing pages. Acquired by Contentsquare in July 2023, it remains the most widely used behavioral analytics tool for SMBs.

Key features. Click, scroll, move, and rage-click heatmaps. Full session replays with filtering by events, pages, and user attributes. On-site polls, NPS surveys, and feedback widgets. Conversion funnel visualization (enhanced post-Contentsquare acquisition). Automatic frustration signal detection (rage clicks, u-turns, error events). AI-powered Highlights that surface key moments from session recordings.

Pricing. Basic: free with 35 daily sessions, limited heatmaps and recordings. Plus: $39/month for 100 daily sessions with filters and page targeting. Business: $99/month for 500 daily sessions, custom integrations, and frustration signals. Scale: $213/month for 2,500 daily sessions, API access, and SAML SSO. Enterprise: custom pricing for unlimited sessions and Contentsquare features.

Best for. Any marketer who wants to understand why visitors aren't converting by watching what they actually do on the page. Best used alongside a testing or optimization tool. Hotjar shows you the problem. Other tools test the fix.

Limitations. Does not run tests or change anything on the page. It's diagnostic only. Session recording sampling on lower tiers misses significant visitor behavior. Heatmaps can be slow to generate for high-traffic pages. Privacy compliance (GDPR) requires careful configuration since default settings may capture PII. Limited filtering and segmentation compared to FullStory or Contentsquare enterprise. Data retention limited on lower tiers to 365 days.

7. Microsoft Clarity

Category: Free behavioral analytics Starting price: Free (everything) G2 rating: 4.4/5 (200+ reviews) | Capterra: 4.8/5 (60+ reviews) Website: clarity.microsoft.com

Microsoft Clarity is a completely free heatmap and session recording tool with no traffic limits, no sampling, and no paywalls. It includes Clarity Copilot for natural-language analysis of user behavior, automatic rage click and dead click detection, and integration with Google Analytics 4.

Key features. Unlimited free heatmaps (click, scroll, area) with no traffic caps. Unlimited session recordings with smart filtering. Clarity Copilot (AI) for asking questions about user behavior in natural language. Rage click and dead click detection. Google Analytics 4 integration linking sessions to GA4 segments. E-commerce dashboards for revenue attribution. AI-generated session and page-level behavior summaries.

Pricing. Free. Everything. Unlimited traffic, unlimited recordings, all features. No paid tiers. No premium upsells. Funded by Microsoft's broader ecosystem.

Best for. Budget-conscious marketers or teams just starting with conversion optimization who need behavioral analytics without any cost barrier. Ideal as a complement to a paid optimization tool. Use Clarity to spot problems for free, then use a testing tool to fix them.

Limitations. 30-day data retention limit. Recordings and heatmap data expire after 30 days, a critical limitation for teams needing historical analysis. No A/B testing, no optimization, no personalization. Purely diagnostic. Less granular filtering and segmentation than Hotjar or FullStory. Copilot insights can be surface-level for complex user journeys. Limited integration ecosystem compared to Hotjar.

8. Leadpages

Category: Budget landing page builder Starting price: $49/month G2 rating: 4.3/5 (230+ reviews) | Capterra: 4.6/5 (300+ reviews) Website: leadpages.com

Leadpages is an affordable landing page and website builder aimed at small businesses and solopreneurs. Its standout feature is unlimited traffic on all plans with no visitor caps or overage charges. It offers AI page generation, basic A/B testing, and a recently added Lead Agent (AI chatbot for lead qualification).

Key features. Simplified drag-and-drop builder with 200+ templates. Unlimited traffic on all plans. AI page generation that creates a complete landing page from a description of the offer. A/B split testing on Standard tier and above (manual 50/50 only). Lead Agent AI chatbot that qualifies leads directly on landing pages. Real-time conversion guidance scoring and suggestions during page building. Popups and alert bars with trigger-based display rules.

Pricing. Standard: $49/month for 5 pages, unlimited traffic, and A/B testing. Pro: $99/month for unlimited pages, AI features, and Lead Agent. Advanced/Agency: $399/month for client sub-accounts and advanced integrations. Pricing was updated in 2025 from the previous $37/$74 structure.

Best for. Small businesses and solopreneurs on a tight budget who need landing pages with unlimited traffic and basic A/B testing. The simplest option for getting a page live fast.

Limitations. Design flexibility is noticeably limited compared to Unbounce or Instapage, and templates feel rigid. No Smart Traffic or intelligent routing. A/B testing is basic manual 50/50 only, with no MVT, no statistical methodology options, and no segment-level analysis. Integrations ecosystem is smaller than Unbounce. Page builder can be buggy with custom CSS. No personalization features and no dynamic text replacement.

9. Kameleoon

Category: AI-enhanced A/B testing and personalization Starting price: ~$495/month G2 rating: 4.4/5 (70+ reviews) | Capterra: 4.4/5 (30+ reviews) Website: kameleoon.com

Kameleoon is an enterprise experimentation and personalization platform with a focus on AI-driven optimization. Its standout innovation is Prompt-Based Experimentation (PBX), where you describe a test in natural language and the AI generates the variants, sets targeting rules, and launches the experiment. It uses multi-armed bandit algorithms for faster convergence and offers both server-side and client-side testing.

Key features. Prompt-Based Experimentation (PBX) that generates and configures experiments from plain language descriptions. AI allocation engine (multi-armed bandit) that automatically shifts traffic to winning variants. Full-stack experimentation with client-side, server-side, and feature flags in one platform. AI-driven predictive targeting based on visitor behavior patterns. Hybrid architecture combining a visual editor with server-side SDK. Privacy-first design with GDPR compliance, server-side data processing, and no third-party cookie requirement.

Pricing. Starter: approximately $495/month for web experimentation and basic AI features. Growth: custom pricing (estimated $1,500 to $5,000/month) for full AI personalization and PBX. Enterprise: custom pricing ($5,000+/month) for unlimited experiments, dedicated CSM, and SLA. Pricing increased in 2025 with the PBX launch. Over 450 companies on the platform.

Best for. Mid-market to enterprise teams (especially in EU or privacy-conscious markets) who want AI-assisted experimentation without Optimizely's price tag and value prompt-based experiment creation as a way to scale testing velocity without scaling headcount.

Limitations. PBX is new and still maturing. Complex experiments still require manual configuration. Smaller review volume means less community knowledge and troubleshooting resources compared to VWO or Optimizely. Visual editor not as polished as VWO. Enterprise pricing can escalate quickly with advanced AI features. Documentation and onboarding materials lag behind feature development.

10. AB Tasty

Category: Enterprise experimentation and personalization (EU) Starting price: ~$15,000/year G2 rating: 4.4/5 (120+ reviews) | Capterra: 4.5/5 (40+ reviews) Website: abtasty.com

AB Tasty is a European enterprise experimentation platform combining client-side and server-side A/B testing with AI-driven personalization. Its EmotionsAI module analyzes visitor navigation patterns to infer emotional state and personalize experiences. AdaptiveCX uses machine learning to automatically select the best experience for each visitor.

Key features. Web and server-side experimentation with A/B, MVT, and multi-page tests using visual and code editors. EmotionsAI analyzing visitor navigation patterns to personalize based on inferred emotional state. AdaptiveCX (ML-based automatic experience selection, similar to Unbounce Smart Traffic but for full-site personalization). Feature management with feature flags, progressive rollouts, and remote configuration. ROI dashboard with revenue attribution tied directly to experiments. EU privacy compliance with GDPR-native design, EU data residency, and no third-party cookie dependency.

Pricing. Essentials: approximately $15,000 to $30,000/year for client-side testing and basic personalization. Growth: approximately $40,000 to $80,000/year for server-side testing, EmotionsAI, and feature flags. Enterprise: approximately $100,000 to $150,000+/year for full stack, AdaptiveCX, dedicated CSM, and SLA. No free plan. No self-serve pricing. Annual contracts required.

Best for. European enterprise organizations (or any company with strict EU data residency requirements) who need a full experimentation and personalization platform with AI-driven audience targeting and don't want to pay Optimizely prices.

Limitations. EmotionsAI is conceptually interesting but hard to validate, with limited transparency into how emotional profiles are determined. Minimum spend of approximately $15K/year prices out SMBs. Visual editor occasionally conflicts with single-page application frameworks. Reporting can be confusing for stakeholders unfamiliar with Bayesian statistics. Feature flag product is less mature than Optimizely's or LaunchDarkly's. Some reviews cite slow test QA processes and preview mode bugs.

The Comparison Table

The Generate-Plus-Test Gap

Most landing page tools do one of two things. They generate content (Unbounce Smart Copy, Leadpages AI, Kameleoon PBX) or they test variants (VWO, Optimizely, AB Tasty). The tools that generate don't use campaign data as input. The tools that test don't generate the content being tested. A human bridges the gap: someone writes the variant copy, someone else sets up the test, someone interprets the results, and someone decides what to try next.

This gap is why 68% of businesses have no structured CRO process and the average enterprise runs only 2.1 tests per month. The process requires multiple skill sets (copywriting, statistical analysis, conversion psychology, ad platform knowledge) that rarely exist on one team.

Foundry closes this gap by combining generation, testing, and learning in a single system that uses campaign data as the input layer. The AI writes variants informed by what the ads are actually saying. Thompson Sampling allocates traffic. The system prunes losers and regenerates informed by failure context. No copywriter. No CRO specialist. No manual test setup. This isn't better A/B testing. It's a different approach entirely.

The tradeoff is control. VWO and Optimizely give a CRO specialist complete control over every variant, every hypothesis, every audience segment. Foundry gives a marketing manager autonomous optimization with an approval step. The right choice depends on whether you have a CRO specialist on staff.

Why Statistical Methodology Affects Your Ad Budget

When you're paying per click, every visitor that enters a test costs money. The methodology determines how many paid visitors you need before you have a result.

Traditional frequentist A/B testing (used by Optimizely, basic Unbounce, Instapage, Leadpages) requires a predetermined sample size, runs until statistical significance is reached, and splits traffic 50/50 regardless of early performance signals. A test might need 10,000+ visitors across both variants before producing a result. At $5 CPC, that's $50,000 in ad spend before you know which headline works better.

Bayesian methods (VWO SmartStats, AB Tasty) report probability of being best rather than p-values and typically produce actionable results 40% faster than frequentist methods. Better, but still human-designed and human-interpreted.

Thompson Sampling (Foundry) and multi-armed bandit approaches (Unbounce Smart Traffic, Kameleoon) allocate traffic dynamically: send more traffic to what's working, less to what isn't, from the start. Google's own research shows MAB approaches reach conclusions with 50 to 75% fewer visitors than traditional A/B. At $5 CPC, that's the difference between $50,000 and $12,500 to $25,000 in ad spend to reach the same insight.

Picking the Right Tool

"I need to build landing pages." Unbounce (best for teams wanting AI routing), Instapage (best for pixel-perfect design and speed), or Leadpages (best for budget with unlimited traffic).

"I need to understand why visitors aren't converting." Hotjar (best for teams with budget for deeper analytics) or Microsoft Clarity (best free option with unlimited recordings).

"I need manual A/B testing with full control." VWO (best mid-market option with Bayesian stats), Optimizely (best for enterprise with feature flags), Kameleoon (best for AI-assisted test creation), or AB Tasty (best for EU privacy compliance).

"I want the page to optimize itself from my campaign data." Foundry. It's the only tool that ingests Google Ads campaign data, generates content from it, tests via Thompson Sampling, and learns autonomously. The tradeoff: less manual control, more automation.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best landing page optimization tool in 2026?

It depends on what you need. For autonomous optimization using campaign data: Foundry ($249/month). For manual A/B testing with a visual editor: VWO (free to $299/month). For building and testing landing pages: Unbounce ($22 to $187/month). For enterprise experimentation: Optimizely ($50K+/year). For free behavioral analytics: Microsoft Clarity ($0). The right tool depends on your team's skill set, budget, and whether you need to build pages or optimize existing ones.

What replaced Google Optimize after it shut down?

Google Optimize was killed on September 30, 2023, leaving approximately 3.5 million websites without free A/B testing. VWO captured the largest share of migrations with a free plan covering 50K monthly tracked users and Bayesian statistics. Microsoft Clarity covers behavioral analytics (heatmaps, recordings) for free but doesn't test. Many SMBs still haven't replaced Google Optimize with anything.

How much do landing page optimization tools cost?

The range is extreme. Microsoft Clarity is free with unlimited everything. Leadpages starts at $49/month. Unbounce starts at $22/month (but Smart Traffic requires $187/month). Foundry starts at $249/month. VWO starts free (50K users) with paid plans from $299/month. Kameleoon starts around $495/month. AB Tasty starts around $15,000/year. Optimizely starts around $50,000/year. The price generally correlates with whether the tool builds pages, tests variants, or does both.

What is the difference between A/B testing and Thompson Sampling?

A/B testing splits traffic 50/50 between variants and waits for statistical significance before declaring a winner. Thompson Sampling dynamically allocates more traffic to better-performing variants from the start, reaching conclusions with 50 to 75% fewer visitors. For PPC traffic where every visitor costs money, Thompson Sampling reduces the ad spend needed to reach a result. VWO uses Bayesian methods (faster than traditional A/B). Foundry and Unbounce Smart Traffic use multi-armed bandit approaches.

Do I need a CRO specialist to use these tools?

It depends on the tool. VWO, Optimizely, Kameleoon, and AB Tasty are designed for CRO specialists or teams with experimentation experience. Unbounce and Leadpages are designed for marketing managers who can build and test pages without specialized CRO knowledge. Hotjar and Clarity require no expertise to install but interpreting the data benefits from experience. Foundry is designed for PPC managers who approve AI-generated variants, no CRO background required.

Can I use more than one of these tools together?

Yes, and most teams should. The most common combinations: a behavioral analytics tool (Hotjar or Clarity) paired with a testing or optimization tool (VWO, Unbounce, or Foundry). The analytics tool shows you what's wrong. The optimization tool tests the fix. Foundry specifically recommends pairing with Hotjar or Clarity since it doesn't include native heatmaps or session recordings.