Segment similar to "next hit" behaviour in fallout view?

[asdf12341z]

I have a page, A, which users can land on either directly, or from CTAs on pages B, C, D, and E.

What I am trying to understand is the best way to summarize the number of visitors who land on page A from each of the other pages B-E. What would be the best way to do this? With a segment? If so, how?

Suppose furthermore that I don't have the evars corresponding to CTA interactions, I just want to create a segment that summarizes the number of visits and number of visitors who arrive on page A, and were on each of pages B, C, D and E immediately before.

Though I understand this could means they could have been on Page B, then directly typed in the web address for Page A, I am not too concerned as this will likely form a very negligible minority of the traffic.

Thanks in advance 

[Jennifer_Dungan]

Fallout reports are a bit different, they are basically sequential steps taken by a user... if you need to see the difference between Page A coming from different pages (in a fallout), I think you would need to create multiple fallouts:

Page B

Then

Page A

OR

Page C

Then

Page A

etc

However, if you don't need them separated, and just need to see B, C, D and E as a combined step, followed by A, you can do:

Page B OR Page C OR Page D OR Page E

Then

Page A

You cannot see different pathing within a fallout since ALL previous steps must be to be met (and in the order they are shown) in the next step within a fallout report.

However, if you don't use a Fallout Report, you could create some custom sequential segments to create your own visualization within a Freeform Table.

[Damonwhall]

Hello @asdf12341z , 

This might work: 

Step 1 - 

Step 2 -

Step 3 - 

Step 4 - 

Step 5 - 

This should allow you to see who is coming from Pages B-D (as a combined possible locations segment) and arrived to A on the next hit (meaning that they clicked on something that sent them to Page "A".  )

[asdf12341z]

Thank you both and @Jennifer_Dungan for your suggestions.

What I was actually hoping for (and sorry if the title is confusing) is to get these same numbers but in the freeform table, because I'd like a way to create summary numbers and conversion rates that are easily and immediately viewable for the users.

Basically I'd have a time dimension, then Page A as the split by visitors and visits, then in the other columns, visits and visitors to Page A from B, then from C, D, E.

I have attached a screenshot of what I envision the output would look like.

Thank you once again for your suggestions and help, it is very much appreciated.

[Jennifer_Dungan · Accepted solution]

Okay, I actually do stuff like this all the time (I use my own custom tables rather than fallouts because I can then break them down by day / week / month and see how the flows are comparing over time).

So I can see that you are in fact wanting to see B separate from C, and separate from D, etc... so let's start with Page A

Page A would be a Simple Hit level segment:

HIT

    Page equals Page A

Now, let's look at the "From Page B Segment"

First off, you need to use a sequence, which means that you have to use some Visit level logic in your segment. Now, while I don't see "Page Views" in your table, I am going to go the extra mile to make sure that IF you add Page Views as a column, that the segment will only return Page B in the context (and not all pages within the visit)

HIT

    Page equals Page B

    AND

    VISIT Container [

        Page equals Page A

        THEN within 1 Page View

        Page equals Page B

    ]

Basically, this segment will pull back only hits on Page B, where the VISIT has the sequence of Page A followed directly by Page B.

This may still return a few extra Page B page views if Page B was hit multiple times in the Visit, but the risks should be fairly low (and right now, you aren't looking for Page Views)

If you just want the simple Sequence (not caring about Page Views for Page B), you can just use:

VISIT

    Page equals Page A

    THEN within 1 Page View

    Page equals Page B

As this won't change your VIsits or Unique Visitor counts.

You can create the same segments for Pages C and D, etc

Once you create your Freeform table, you can stack your segments with your metrics like so:

Then you can create ad hoc calculated metrics by selecting the metrics (and segment) and right clicking to "Create Metric from Selection", then choose "Divide"

After you make it, you can edit it to adjust the name, display as Percent, and make sure the math was done in the correct order.

Please note, sometimes when you have multiple metrics stacked under a single segment, the Create Metric from Selected will use the first metric instead of the selected one... if that happens, just temporarily move stuff around to make it one metric per segment until you've made the calculated metric, then put it back... Or create a whole copy of the table to make the calculated metrics in, then drag those back up into the proper table... then delete the temp table when you are done.

Hope this helps

[Jennifer_Dungan]

Oh, I should mention, if you have a fallout report, you can also right click on a node and create a segment from that step... this will create a "permanent" segment in your components list (which is why I never use this feature - I like to keep our component repository clean with items that will be used many times, not one-off segments)... but you may not have those same concerns

[asdf12341z]

Amazing, thank you so much! I really appreciate your help!!

[Jennifer_Dungan]

You're very welcome  

[asdf12341z]

Just a quick point of clarification, since I'm after from Page B to Page A, should this logic:

    Page equals Page A

    THEN within 1 Page View

    Page equals Page B

changed to:

    Page equals Page B

    THEN within 1 Page View

    Page equals Page A

[Jennifer_Dungan]

Lol, yes...  stand-ins like "Page A", "Page B", etc are somewhat interchangeable when creating samples, and sometimes my mind reverts to alphabetical sampling 

The logic of the rules is more important in those samples, but good catch.

[asdf12341z]

Haha thank you for the clarification, you are an Adobe god!

[asdf12341z]

Sorry to keep harping on this thread and for the constant q's but I was hoping to get some clarity around the visit-level containers. I had no idea these were a thing, how is it different from specifying 'visit' at the top, and why doesn't the logic work when we use a hit-level container? For instance, in the image attached, the top part uses the logic you suggested with visit-containers (and works), the bottom part uses hit-containers (and doesn't work). 

[Jennifer_Dungan]

It's no problem at all.. segments can be complex, and I want to be sure you understand so that you can take these learnings and apply them to new and create segments.

Scope can be hard to understand... but in both the segment level and the container level the behaviour is very similar.

• Hit Level (all the items within must happen on the same tracking call - the "hit")
• Visit Level (all the items within must happen in the same visit, but can be on different hits... one thing that you must remember is that sometimes you actually need to put Hit level containers inside a Visit to constrain a combination of factors - more on that in a bit)
• Visitor Level (all the items within must happen to the same user, but this can be across multiple visits - again, you may need to stack smaller scope items inside of this)

In your sample, because you have a THEN logic, which by the very definition of then means that there must be at least 2 hits... one for the the first part, and one for the second... so having those inside of a HIT level container means there is a conflict... the container is looking for everything to be on the same server call, but THEN is looking for there to be a server call with X criteria followed later by Y criteria.

This is why the HIT level container is failing.

Technically speaking, you don't need that outer container, the segment itself will act as the overall bounding of the logic (since you aren't adding any additional logic to the segment, such as an exclude).

Now, what I mentioned earlier... sometimes you need containers to bind things together.

If you look at the inner container in your sample, you have a HIT level container with:

Page starts with X

AND

Page does not contain Y

(also, you don't technically need the container around the does not contain here, but its also not hurting anything)

This needs to be a HIT container, as you need to make sure that on the same HIT, the Page has "X" and does not have "Y"....

If this were a VISIT level container, then X and Y wouldn't need to be on the same hit... in fact, and page that did not contain Y would match the criteria... even if Y was part of the visit.... often when looking at Visit or Visitor level, you actually need to use exclude logic rather than "does not contain" to explicitly ensure that visits with pages containing Y aren't returned.

Try to think of each part of the logic (it will get better with practice)... each part of the logic (start with the lowest), what are you trying to look at? This will help determine the scope of the container.

You can even add Visit or Visitor containers inside of a HIT level segment... for instance.. If I only want to return data for Hits on specific items like a conversion, but I need to constrain it to Visits that came from a newsletter for example... I can create a HIT level container looking for the only the conversions, but I can add a VISIT level container to specify that I need those HITs to be constrained to VISITS with Y.