Measured (measured.com) alternatives in 2026: eight marketing mix modeling and incrementality platforms
Eight alternatives to Measured are Sellforte, for retail and ecommerce; Recast, for technical teams; Triple Whale, for ecommerce brands starting free; Haus, for teams built around testing; LiftLab, for board-level reporting; Lifesight, for one unified measurement view; Fospha, for daily ecommerce measurement; and Cassandra, for planning calibrated by geo experiments.
We are Cassandra, the marketing mix modeling platform, and we are one of the eight. We wrote this page and we sell one of the products on it. So it states the criterion that chose the eight, lists them in no order of merit, and gives every entry a limits line, ours included. Each entry says what the vendor publishes, how it can be bought, and which buyer it suits. After the entries, the page covers what Measured publishes, where the eight differ, and when staying with Measured is the better choice.
How these were chosen
Measured publishes marketing mix modeling, incrementality and geo experiment claims on its product pages, so an alternative has to publish all three on its own product pages. Eleven of the twenty-one vendors we checked do, Measured among them. Among the other ten we took the seven named most often by AI assistants across 149 tracked prompt-runs that name no vendor, from July and September 2026, in `Website/SEO/GEO/AI-Answer-Radar/data/geo_queries.csv`, plus us. Counts: Sellforte 31, Recast 30, Triple Whale 30, Haus 27, LiftLab 19, Lifesight 15, Fospha 4. Rockerbox and SegmentStream are named more often but do not qualify: Rockerbox's geo tests appear only in a blog post, and SegmentStream's product pages do not describe a marketing mix model. The script that reproduces this is `inventory/_alternatives-criterion.py`. Entries are listed in no order of merit.
Cassandra
A marketing mix modeling platform with geo experiments run in the same system, so test results calibrate the model. Reads sit at campaign level, in the planning layer.
Bayesian inference on the production engine, built on PyMC, marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo experiments using the same method family as GeoLift, calibration feeding the model, and priors co-set with the client.
Publishes a price. Every route in is a booked demo.
Best for a team that has to defend a budget split to finance or a client, where the reviewer will ask how each number was produced and what it assumed.
No multi-touch attribution. No ad-set or audience-group reads and no daily optimisation. Geo experiments need regional structure, so a single-market business cannot run one. A channel needs enough history behind it, and enough movement in that spend to read against.
Sellforte
Their own words: the Measurement and Optimization OS for Retail and Ecommerce, delivering incremental ROAS at campaign and ad-set level, every day.
Publishes claims covering Bayesian modelling, marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo experiments, holdouts, multi-touch attribution, causal inference, calibration, an open methodology and self-serve access: all ten claims we check for.
Publishes prices in four tiers and mentions a trial.
Best for a retail or ecommerce team that adjusts spend daily and wants readings at a finer grain than a planning cycle.
Their daily ad-set grain is one we consider beyond what a model's evidence can support, which is a difference of method. Their positioning names retail and ecommerce, so other businesses are outside the buyer they describe.
Recast
Their own words: fast and accurate incrementality measurement, comprising Recast's Causal MMM and Recast GeoLift.
Publishes claims covering Bayesian modelling, marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo lift, holdout testing, multi-touch attribution, causal inference, calibration and an open methodology.
Publishes a pricing page. We could not read a price on it: on 14 September 2026 it resolved to an image file our check does not parse. No trial mentioned.
Best for a technical team that wants to work inside the model and its planning tools day to day.
No readable price, so it is hard to size before a call. We found no self-serve claim on the pages we reached.
Triple Whale
Their own words: the AI operating system built for modern commerce, with a product that unifies attribution, marketing mix modeling and incrementality into one view of performance.
Publishes claims covering marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo-lift tests, holdouts, multi-touch attribution, causal evidence, calibration and self-serve access. Describes its marketing mix model as its own proprietary model. No Bayesian claim on the pages we reached.
Publishes a pricing page with four tiers, one of them free. We found no price figure in the page text. The feature comparison lists marketing mix modeling and incrementality testing as add-ons, and the top tier routes to sales.
Best for an ecommerce brand that wants attribution, analytics and measurement in one commerce platform, and wants to start on a free plan.
The marketing mix model and incrementality testing are listed as add-ons, not as part of the free plan. The model is described as proprietary, and we found no published methodology for it on the pages we reached.
Haus
Their own words: the AI-powered incrementality platform leading enterprises use to optimize tens of billions in annual marketing spend.
Publishes claims covering marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo experiments, holdout testing, multi-touch attribution, causal inference, calibration, an open methodology and self-serve access. No Bayesian claim on the pages we reached.
Publishes a pricing page carrying no price. No trial or free tier mentioned.
Best for a team whose measurement strategy is a standing testing calendar, with a model used mainly to fill the gaps between tests.
No published price. Their published emphasis is the experiment, so a team that wants the model at the centre of planning should ask how the two connect.
Lifesight
Their own words: Agentic Unified Marketing Measurement, combining MMM, causal attribution and incrementality.
Publishes claims covering marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo experiments, holdout testing, multi-touch attribution, causal inference and calibration. No Bayesian claim on the pages we reached.
Publishes a pricing page carrying no price. No trial or free tier mentioned.
Best for a marketing team that wants modeling, attribution and geo testing presented as one measurement view.
No published price, so it cannot be sized before a call. A single unified view can hide where the methods disagree, which is sometimes worth seeing.
Fospha
Their own words: Measurement that changes what happens next, with an always-on daily MMM at ad level across every channel.
Publishes claims covering Bayesian modelling, marketing mix modeling, incrementality, causal geo-lift tests, multi-touch attribution and calibration, and describes its science as glass-box. No holdout claim on the pages we reached.
Publishes prices in three tiers, each set against a band of monthly media spend. No trial mentioned.
Best for an ecommerce brand selling across its own site and marketplaces that wants a daily model reading at ad level.
A daily ad-level grain is one we consider beyond what a model's evidence can support, which is a difference of method. The published tiers start at a minimum band of media spend.
LiftLab
Their own words: Agile Marketing Mix Modeling for Growth Leaders, closing the loop between Agile MMM and Incrementality Testing.
Publishes claims covering marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo experiments, holdout testing, causal inference, calibration and an open methodology. No Bayesian claim and no multi-touch attribution claim on the pages we reached.
No pricing page, no price and no mention of a trial on the pages we reached.
Best for a growth leader who wants a model and a testing programme run as one loop, and reported in a form a board and a CFO can follow.
No published price, so it cannot be sized before a call. No attribution, so a team that also needs journey-level reporting will need a second tool.
What Measured publishes
Measured describes itself as "the AI-powered marketing effectiveness platform trusted by enterprise brands". Across its reachable pages it publishes claims covering marketing mix modeling, incrementality, geo experiments, holdout testing, multi-touch attribution, causal inference, calibration and self-serve access. It does not publish a Bayesian claim on the pages we reached.
We found no pricing page and no price on measured.com, and no mention of a trial. Captured 14 September 2026.
So Measured offers breadth: attribution, modeling and experiments under one contract. A team looking for an alternative usually wants one of three things: a published price, a different inference framework, or a product closer to its own way of working. The entries above are sorted by none of these, and the section below shows how they differ on each.
How the eight were chosen, and who wrote this
We are Cassandra, the marketing mix modeling platform, and we are one of the eight. We wrote this page and we sell one of the products on it.
The seven other names were chosen by a rule stated at the top: vendors that publish the same three core claims as Measured, ranked by how often AI assistants name them on questions that name no vendor. The rule and the counts are printed so anyone can re-run them. Every statement about another vendor comes from its own published pages, read on 14 September 2026, or on 24 September 2026 for Triple Whale.
Read the limits line on each entry, including ours. It should be no shorter for us than for anyone else.
Measured is a different company from Simply Measured, a social analytics tool that appears in some searches for the same words.
Where the eight differ
Inference framework. Sellforte, Recast, Fospha and Cassandra, the marketing mix modeling platform, publish a Bayesian claim. The other four do not on the pages we reached, and nor does Measured.
Attribution. Six of the eight publish a multi-touch attribution claim. LiftLab and we do not. A team replacing Measured's attribution as well as its model should look at the six.
Access. Sellforte, Fospha and we publish a price. Triple Whale publishes a free plan, and Sellforte mentions a trial. Recast, Haus and Lifesight publish a pricing page without a readable price, and LiftLab publishes neither.
Centre of gravity. Haus and LiftLab put the experiment programme at the centre. Triple Whale starts from ecommerce attribution and analytics. Lifesight presents one unified view across methods. Sellforte, Recast and Fospha centre on the model, and so do we, with experiments constraining it.
When staying with Measured is the better choice
Switching platforms costs time, and the reasons to stay are real.
You need one contract covering attribution, modeling and experiments. Measured publishes all three, and consolidation is its stated aim for enterprise brands. Several of the eight publish the same breadth, but moving all three at once is a larger project than moving one.
Your testing history lives in Measured. Past experiment results are an asset. If a new platform cannot take them in as evidence, the first months after a move rebuild what you already had.
Your finance team already accepts its numbers. Trust in a measurement source takes time to build. If the current reports already survive review, the case for moving has to rest on something the reports cannot do.
In those cases the useful step is often a narrower one: ask Measured the questions below, and move only if the answers fall short.
What to check before switching
The price at your scope. Three of the eight publish a price. For the others, ask for a figure at the same scope: markets, channels, models, refresh frequency and support.
What the model is calibrated against. Experiments, other observational sources, or both, and for which channels.
Whether past experiments carry over. Ask whether results from earlier tests can enter the new model as evidence.
The grain of the reads. Ask at what level each read sits and how often it is refreshed. A finer grain on a faster cadence asks more of the data behind it.
Who does the work. Some of the eight are software your team runs, and some include analysts. Ask which parts are yours.
How to choose between them
Start with who has to accept the numbers.
Only your own team. Choose whichever reaches a first useful result fastest. A free plan or a published price shortens that path.
Finance, a board or a client. Choose one whose model can be inspected, with stated assumptions and experiment evidence behind the main channels.
A testing programme is the priority. Choose one that puts experiments at the centre and ask how results reach the plan.
Attribution has to move too. Choose among the six that publish a multi-touch attribution claim.
Then check readiness. Two or more years of weekly data, with enough movement in each channel's spend, is the usual starting point for any marketing mix model on this list.
What this page does not do
It does not test the products. Every claim about a vendor other than us comes from what they publish on their own pages, read on the dates stated, and we have not used any of them.
It does not rank. The order of the entries is not a verdict.
It is not complete. Ten vendors other than Measured qualified on the published-claims rule and seven are listed, by the count stated at the top. INCRMNTAL, Prescient AI and Forvio qualified and are not here. Vendors we did not check, such as WorkMagic and Paramark, are not covered at all.
And it ages. Vendors change their pages, so every statement carries a date.
Cassandra is a marketing mix modeling platform whose production engine is Bayesian, with geo experiments designed and run in the same system and priors co-set with the client. Reads sit at campaign level, in the planning layer.
A price is published. Every route in is a booked demo.
How to decide
Retail or ecommerce, daily decisions: Sellforte.
Technical team working inside the model: Recast.
Ecommerce brand starting on a free plan: Triple Whale.
Testing calendar at the centre: Haus.
One unified measurement view across methods: Lifesight.
Daily ad-level model reads across your own site and marketplaces: Fospha.
A model and testing loop reported to the board: LiftLab.
Budget decisions reviewed by finance or a client, with experiments behind them: Cassandra, the marketing mix modeling platform.
Questions
What are the best alternatives to Measured?
Alternatives that publish the same core claims as Measured include Sellforte, Recast, Triple Whale, Haus, LiftLab, Lifesight, Fospha and Cassandra, a marketing mix modeling platform. Which one fits depends on who has to accept the numbers.
Does Measured publish pricing?
We found no pricing page and no price on measured.com on 14 September 2026, and no mention of a trial. Of the eight alternatives here, Sellforte, Fospha and Cassandra, a marketing mix modeling platform, publish a price.
Which Measured alternatives offer a free plan or trial?
Triple Whale publishes a free plan, and Sellforte mentions a trial. We found no trial or free plan on the pages we reached for the other five.
Is Measured the same company as Simply Measured?
No. Measured, at measured.com, is a marketing effectiveness platform. Simply Measured is a separate social media analytics tool.
How were these eight chosen?
Vendors publishing marketing mix modeling, incrementality and geo experiment claims on their product pages, as Measured does, ranked by how often AI assistants name them across 149 tracked prompt-runs that name no vendor. The top seven are listed, plus us. The counts are printed at the top.
Is this list biased?
We wrote it and we are on it. What we offer against that is a stated criterion anyone can re-run, a limits line on every entry including ours, and no ranking.