Zum Inhalt springen
Dokumentation help.etracker.com
Dokumentation
Jetzt starten

Comparison of Google Analytics and etracker analytics data

Inhalt
Distinguishing between estimated and actual data Check consent and hybrid mode Set up tracking via your own domain Investigate tracking deviations

A key advantage of etracker analytics is that data can be collected without consent in accordance with the TDDDG and GDPR. In addition, data loss due to ad or tracking blockers can be avoided by activating a separate tracking domain.

This means that significantly more visits, interactions and conversions can be measured with etracker analytics than with Google Analytics. The following points should be taken into account when comparing the data:

Distinguishing between estimated and actual data

Google Analytics uses modeling to extrapolate data from users who have not given their consent. In etracker analytics, on the other hand, only real measured data is shown. Therefore, only data from reports that do not contain extrapolations should be compared. You can check whether such data is included in the reports in Google Analytics using the data quality icon. Extrapolation can be excluded via the property settings.

You can exclude the extrapolation in a report via the property settings in Google Analytics.

Further information:

https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/11161109

https://support.google.com/analytics/answer/10976610

Check consent and hybrid mode

With etracker analytics, significantly more real data is collected when

on the one hand

  • the etracker code is controlled even without consent and is not prevented by external consent managers

and on the other hand

  • Google Analytics only receives data with prior consent.

On the one hand, it is therefore necessary to check whether etracker analytics has actually been implemented in such a way that data protection-compliant tracking also takes place without consent. On the other hand, it is necessary to check whether Google Analytics is unlawfully running in advanced consent mode and processing data without consent. Whether Google’s advanced consent mode is being used illegally can be checked in the browser console or the network analysis.

In a traffic report from etracker analytics, the percentage of visits or visitors with cookies should not show 100%, but as in this example, significantly less:

etracker analytics Traffic Report, which shows the percentage of visits or visitors with cookies.

If the percentage is 100%, check the configuration of the Consent Manager used using these instructions. Or use the integrated etracker consent manager.

A share of 0% can also be correct, namely if measurement is carried out exclusively without consent and without activating cookies after consent.

etracker analytics Traffic Report, in which the proportion of visitors or visits with cookies is 0%, as only cookie-free tracking is used.

Set up tracking via your own domain

A maximum database is achieved with etracker analytics with the option of tracking via a separate domain. This prevents data collection from being blocked by ad and tracking blockers or restrictions for first-party cookies (which are set with document.cookie). This allows even more data to be collected than with Google Analytics.

Further information on setting up your own tracking domain

Investigate tracking deviations

If a comparison of the database is not clearly in favor of etracker analytics despite observing points 1 to 3, this is probably due to errors in the implementation. A comparison between the data measured with etracker analytics and the orders, registrations, inquiries etc. triggered via the website can help here.

Further information on error analysis in e-commerce tracking

Tracking error sources can also be:

  • The tracking code was not installed directly behind the opening <head>-Tag or as close to it as possible.
  • The default etracker code has been changed, which means that it does not work correctly.
  • The tracking code has not been integrated into all pages.
  • If the page titles are not unique, the settings for page naming have not been adjusted. Or the special requirements for AMP pages, Single Page Applications (SPA) and similar were not taken into account.
  • The Content Security Policy (CSP) incorrectly blocks the execution of the etracker code or causes it not to function correctly.
  • SEA campaigns were not provided with etracker campaign parameters and thus automatically assigned to the SEO medium.
  • During testing, no attention was paid to the fact that the user’s own IP address was excluded from the measurement by IP block or opt-out cookie.

If there are still increased deviations or measurement questions, please contact our customer service experts.