nod.

Why teams switch to nod.

One honest table. Competitors keep their real checks. This is analysis, not marketing.

The row nobody else has a check in

Attribution suites measure. nod. also acts: the Meta and Google campaign builders and the creative approval board live in the same product as the pixel. If your bottleneck is deciding and launching, not measuring, that single row is the comparison that matters.

nod.TripleWhaleKLARNorthbeam
Price & model
One plan, everything includedOne flat plan, no usage meteringusage-basedrevenue-tiered$$$$
Price stays flat as you grow
Act
Launch campaigns in-product (Meta + Google)
Creative approval included
AI strategy papers + agentMoby, insights
Measure
Multi-touch attribution
Own first-party pixelAttribution tier
Contribution margin daily (CM1–3)partial
Creative analytics
Cohorts & LTV
Lead-gen journey (CRM → customer)partialpartial
Trust
EU-hosted, GDPR-native

"One plan" stays true after beta: the tiers change the price, never the scope.

When to pick which

TripleWhale

Strong for large ecom stacks with in-house data teams. Deep dashboards and a first-party pixel of their own, priced by usage as you scale. Its Moby AI and the breadth of dashboards reward teams that live in data all day. If you have an analyst and rising ad spend, it earns its price.

nod. if: you want launch and approval in the same tool, at a price that does not move with your revenue.
Full TripleWhale comparison
KLAR

Strong analytics depth and honest contribution margin. Built to measure, not to act: no campaign launch, no creative approval. Its contribution-margin work is the reference in the DACH market, and the reporting depth is real. If measuring is your whole problem, KLAR solves it well.

nod. if: you want the same GDPR-native measurement plus the builders and the board around it.
Full KLAR comparison
Northbeam

Enterprise MMM for eight-figure spenders who live in incrementality models. Powerful, and priced for that world. MMM and incrementality testing at that depth need dedicated people to act on them. If you have that team, Northbeam is built for you.

nod. if: you want first-party attribution and the full loop without an enterprise contract.
Full Northbeam comparison

What the pricing models actually mean

Four tools, four ways to charge. The differences only show up on your invoice months later, so here they are up front.

TripleWhale
Usage-based

The price follows your event volume and feature tier. Traffic grows, the bill grows with it — predictable in shape, not in size.

KLAR
Revenue-tiered

Priced by your shop's revenue band. Clean and honest, and it steps up exactly when your revenue does.

Northbeam
Enterprise contract

Annual agreements, sales-led pricing, built for eight-figure spenders with an incrementality team.

nod.
Flat, then a published ladder

One flat plan during beta, locked for as long as you stay. After beta, new customers pay by revenue band, the same band for everyone in it. A price list, not a negotiation.

Your band comes off your own net revenue of the last 12 months, synced from your store, not off how the call went. Beta customers keep their price for as long as they stay.

Switching without losing your history

Connect your ad accounts, your store and your email tool, and nod. backfills history from the platforms themselves — spend, campaigns, orders. The pixel goes live on your domain in minutes and starts building first-party journeys from day one. Most teams run nod. next to their old tool for a few weeks and compare numbers before they cancel anything. Contracts are monthly, so the overlap costs one invoice, not a year.

History backfills from your platformsPixel live in minutes, journeys from day oneRun both tools in parallel, cancel monthly
Comparing approval tools instead? Filestage, Frame.io, Ziflow, Loom

Bring your stack to the demo. We'll show you what changes.