4 ms·
Better way perhaps we do is compare Cloudflare visitors to GA visitors over same time frame. This method doesn’t measure people with JS disabled. I think it’s
by TomGullen 6y ago
Better way perhaps we do is compare Cloudflare visitors to GA visitors over same time frame. This method doesn’t measure people with JS disabled.
I think it’s important to remember also with large numbers a percent of users blocking GA is likely not a big deal - you just want something generally accurate. Switching analytics providers to get more data isn’t in itself a reason to switch.
If people care about payload size of tracking scripts on their site then I see a good opportunity here for CDNs to offer analytics.
- K0nserv 6y agoI haven't found an answer to this elsewhere and I've also asked Cloudflare but it's unclear if Cloudflare's analytics filters known bots in any way which AFAIK GA does.
- markosaric 6y agoMy idea was to use server logs too but AWStats showed more than 100% higher number of unique visitors and more than 18 times higher number in page views (both compared to Plausible numbers) so I excluded it from the study as I thought it’s very inaccurate.
- JeanMarcS 6y agoAs I understand that unique visitor would be higher (awstats, IIRC, considers that after an hour, a same IP is a new visitor), I don't get how you can have that number for page views. I guess it depends on people gowing back to pages and JS is not executed, but logs are updated ? Strange.
- markosaric 6y agoIt's strange. My best guess is that despite AWStats filtering bots, many do get through. It was easy to see as most viewed pages according to AWStats were back end pages etc. I tried Webalizer with similar results too. I published the stats difference here: https://plausible.io/blog/server-log-analysis https://plausible.io/blog/server-log-analysis