Compare
Tailor vs Optimizely: Which fits performance marketing teams?
Last updated February 21, 2026 · Optimizely website
TL;DR
- Choose Tailor if your bottleneck is shipping variants fast and you want a marketer-led loop.
- Choose Optimizely if you already run experimentation as a program and need enterprise governance, stats engines, and feature flagging.
- If you're not sure, decide based on who owns experimentation day-to-day: marketers or a centralized program.
If you're X, choose Y
Choose Tailor
Your paid team needs to ship 10 landing page variants this month without a developer ticket.
Choose Optimizely
You have an experimentation org, a stats team reviewing results, and a governance process for what gets shipped.
Not sure? Ask who actually ships changes day-to-day. If it's a marketer, you need marketer-led tooling.
Side-by-side
| Category | Tailor | Optimizely |
|---|---|---|
| Who it's for | Performance marketing teams (paid, demand gen) | Enterprise experimentation programs |
| Operating model | Marketer-led: browser extension, no dev required | Program-led: centralized team, devs involved |
| Time to first variant | Minutes | Days to weeks (integration, QA, approvals) |
| Personalization targeting | Ad, UTM, geo, audience segment, referrer | Audience rules, feature flags, CDP integration |
| Experimentation depth | Built-in A/B with page-level analytics | Full stats engine, multi-armed bandit, feature experiments |
| AI copy generation | Yes — in the editing workflow | No built-in AI copy generation |
| Governance | Lightweight — marketer publishes directly | Approval workflows, change management |
| Setup and maintenance | GTM tag + Chrome extension, self-serve | Significant IT/dev lift, ongoing dev dependency |
| Price range | SMB–mid-market SaaS pricing | Enterprise contract pricing |
Who it's for
- Tailor
- Performance marketing teams (paid, demand gen)
- Optimizely
- Enterprise experimentation programs
Operating model
- Tailor
- Marketer-led: browser extension, no dev required
- Optimizely
- Program-led: centralized team, devs involved
Time to first variant
- Tailor
- Minutes
- Optimizely
- Days to weeks (integration, QA, approvals)
Personalization targeting
- Tailor
- Ad, UTM, geo, audience segment, referrer
- Optimizely
- Audience rules, feature flags, CDP integration
Experimentation depth
- Tailor
- Built-in A/B with page-level analytics
- Optimizely
- Full stats engine, multi-armed bandit, feature experiments
AI copy generation
- Tailor
- Yes — in the editing workflow
- Optimizely
- No built-in AI copy generation
Governance
- Tailor
- Lightweight — marketer publishes directly
- Optimizely
- Approval workflows, change management
Setup and maintenance
- Tailor
- GTM tag + Chrome extension, self-serve
- Optimizely
- Significant IT/dev lift, ongoing dev dependency
Price range
- Tailor
- SMB–mid-market SaaS pricing
- Optimizely
- Enterprise contract pricing
Where each wins
Tailor wins when:
- You need to ship variants without a developer
- Your test velocity is limited by process, not ideas
- Paid campaigns need specific landing pages per ad or audience
- You want AI to draft copy variants in the editing flow
Optimizely wins when:
- You run experiments across web, mobile, and server-side flags
- You have a dedicated stats team reviewing significance
- Governance and audit trails are a hard requirement
- You're already in the Optimizely ecosystem
Curious if Tailor fits your team?
Questions to ask on the sales call
These questions apply regardless of which tool you're evaluating.
- 1.Who actually ships changes day-to-day — a marketer or a developer?
- 2.What does "personalization" mean in your product: targeting, copy generation, or both?
- 3.How do you avoid flicker, performance regressions, and broken analytics?
- 4.What is the minimum traffic needed for statistically useful results?
- 5.What's the approval and rollback model?
- 6.What integrations are required for real measurement?
If your bottleneck is shipping, Tailor is built for that.
Book a demo and see how fast your team can ship landing page variants.