ReplayIndex Methodology
ReplayIndex evaluates session replay and heatmap tools by role fit, pricing, implementation effort, privacy questions, and practical usefulness. We separate sourced claims, vendor-stated claims, editorial judgment, and hands-on testing notes.
What we evaluate
- Role fit: whether the tool is better for UX, product, engineering, growth, or founder workflows.
- Pricing risk: session volume, seats, retention, add-ons, overages, and quote-based tiers.
- Implementation effort: script setup, QA, ownership, performance checks, and rollout complexity.
- Privacy considerations: masking, suppression, retention, access controls, and consent review.
- Decision value: whether the tool helps a team make a clearer buying, product, UX, or engineering decision.
Claim labels
| Label | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Sourced | Linked to a vendor page, documentation page, pricing page, or other source. |
| Vendor-stated | Based on how the vendor describes its own product. Not independently verified by ReplayIndex. |
| Editorial judgment | ReplayIndex's interpretation of fit, risk, or tradeoff based on available evidence. |
| Tested | Reserved for observations from hands-on product use. We do not use this label without test notes. |
Affiliate policy
ReplayIndex may earn commissions when readers buy through some links. Affiliate relationships do not guarantee placement, and non-affiliate tools can still be recommended when they are a better fit. See the affiliate disclosure.
Update policy
Pricing and feature packaging change often. Pages should include update dates and source links where pricing or product claims affect buying decisions. Exact pricing should be verified before publication and reviewed regularly.
What is not included
ReplayIndex does not provide legal, privacy, security, or compliance advice. We flag questions to review, but your team should confirm requirements with vendor documentation and internal policies.