Last but not least: data protection
Posted: Sat Feb 01, 2025 7:13 am
I assume that the providers are in a GDPR-compliant area due to the company-based data, because no personal reference is made in the tracking. The providers guarantee that their tools are used in compliance with data protection regulations and some offer reports for different legislations (DSGVO/GDPR, CCPA, etc.) to prove data protection compliance.
However, both tools differ in many ways in terms of technology and data protection:
It also works without cookies!
Albacross relies entirely on cookies for its tracking , which means that in Europe the consent of users is always required , as a file (e.g. cookie) is stored on the user's device for identification purposes. This means that the user journey of consented users can be tracked with more touchpoints (e.g. visits), as the devices can also be assigned to a company in bolivia phone number data other locations (e.g. at home or on the train). The disadvantage is that a lot of data and identification is lost due to the mandatory consent if the tool is integrated into the consent banner in compliance with data protection regulations, as many users do not consent.
SalesViewer follows a different, non-cookie-based approach , which means the tool can work in compliance with GDPR even without consent . This allows the entire website data to be analyzed - the number of identified leads is significantly higher.
Conclusion: Quality instead of quantity
In my opinion, the principle of website visitor identification is a very exciting and complementary lead source, which can be particularly useful in the B2B sector. It makes sense to expand your tech stack with a tool of this kind, because you get "tangible" results relatively quickly and inexpensively that you can use straight away.
The time from the impulse, through the actual, qualified lead, to the first conversation with a customer can be shortened by using such tools.
However, the tested providers differ enormously in terms of data quality, data volume, functionality and price.
While Albacross scores with a very modern appearance, many integrations and a reasonable price , SalesViewer scores with very accurate data quality, a high recognition rate and very easy operation .
The goal of lead generation is to generate “qualified” leads. For this reason, in this comparison, the quality of the leads plays a greater role than the quantity and is therefore the decisive evaluation factor.
Since the data is used in sales and marketing and therefore requires human resources, SalesViewer is by far the qualitative test winner because, in comparison to the large amount of data from Albacross, it does not provide falsified, incomplete or provider-based data, but rather complete and actual leads. You can work with the data very clearly and immediately.
Important: Of course, this is just a snapshot as both providers are evolving. I therefore recommend that you take a close look at the tools yourself and start your own test to find the perfect solution for you.
However, both tools differ in many ways in terms of technology and data protection:
It also works without cookies!
Albacross relies entirely on cookies for its tracking , which means that in Europe the consent of users is always required , as a file (e.g. cookie) is stored on the user's device for identification purposes. This means that the user journey of consented users can be tracked with more touchpoints (e.g. visits), as the devices can also be assigned to a company in bolivia phone number data other locations (e.g. at home or on the train). The disadvantage is that a lot of data and identification is lost due to the mandatory consent if the tool is integrated into the consent banner in compliance with data protection regulations, as many users do not consent.
SalesViewer follows a different, non-cookie-based approach , which means the tool can work in compliance with GDPR even without consent . This allows the entire website data to be analyzed - the number of identified leads is significantly higher.
Conclusion: Quality instead of quantity
In my opinion, the principle of website visitor identification is a very exciting and complementary lead source, which can be particularly useful in the B2B sector. It makes sense to expand your tech stack with a tool of this kind, because you get "tangible" results relatively quickly and inexpensively that you can use straight away.
The time from the impulse, through the actual, qualified lead, to the first conversation with a customer can be shortened by using such tools.
However, the tested providers differ enormously in terms of data quality, data volume, functionality and price.
While Albacross scores with a very modern appearance, many integrations and a reasonable price , SalesViewer scores with very accurate data quality, a high recognition rate and very easy operation .
The goal of lead generation is to generate “qualified” leads. For this reason, in this comparison, the quality of the leads plays a greater role than the quantity and is therefore the decisive evaluation factor.
Since the data is used in sales and marketing and therefore requires human resources, SalesViewer is by far the qualitative test winner because, in comparison to the large amount of data from Albacross, it does not provide falsified, incomplete or provider-based data, but rather complete and actual leads. You can work with the data very clearly and immediately.
Important: Of course, this is just a snapshot as both providers are evolving. I therefore recommend that you take a close look at the tools yourself and start your own test to find the perfect solution for you.