Comparisons

作者 fullstorydevb20614e2d08d無授權條款11 個星標收錄於 2026年10月8日更新於 2026年10月8日儲存庫3 天前更新

How to structure A vs B comparisons in Fullstory — when to use dimensionality (event/session properties) vs separate segments (user-level properties), and why the distinction matters for correctness.

僅含說明Data & Analytics
AI 產生的概覽

指導在 Fullstory 中建立 A 與 B 比較時,如何選擇維度拆分或區隔族群。

功能
此技能說明如何將比較軸歸類為事件/工作階段屬性或使用者層級屬性,並說明各自應使用的 Fullstory 機制。對於事件屬性,它說明如何建立帶有分組維度的 top_n 指標;對於使用者屬性,它說明如何為每個族群各建立一個指標和一個區隔。它也以範例解釋為何選錯機制會導致計數錯誤。
適用情境
當使用者要求在 Fullstory 中比較 A 與 B,而正確機制並不明確時使用。它用於在建立或調整指標與區隔之前,判斷應採用維度拆分還是區隔族群。
執行需求
需要 Fullstory 的指標與區隔工具(build_metric、update_metric、compute_metric、build_segment、update_segment),以及對 Fullstory 資料的存取權限。不包含指令碼,僅為說明文件。

Comparisons

When the user asks to compare A vs B, the right mechanism depends on what the comparison axis is. Use the decision table below to classify it — the user doesn't need to know this distinction exists.

Event/session properties → dimensionality

If the comparison axis describes the context of an individual event at the moment it fired — not the user who triggered it — use dimensionality. Common examples: device type, browser, OS, page URL, element. But the rule is the principle, not the list: if the property travels with the event, not the user, it belongs here. Express it as a single top_n metric with the comparison axis as the grouping dimension.

Example: "rage clicks on mobile vs desktop" → fullstory:build_metric(query="rage clicks by device type", output_type="top_n"). The result table shows mobile and desktop as separate rows.

To refine an established comparison metric (e.g., "add a Chrome-only filter"), pass its metric_id to fullstory:update_metric with a refinement instruction rather than rebuilding.

Do not use segments for event properties. Building a "mobile users" segment and a "desktop users" segment would assign all of a user's rage clicks to whichever device they ever used — even clicks that happened on the other device.

User-level properties → separate segments

Properties that describe a user rather than an event should use segments. The key mechanism: Fullstory resolves user properties to the user's last known value for that key. This canonical value is what segment queries match against — so you're asking "what bucket is this user in now?", not "what was their value at the moment of each event?".

Built-in user properties that work this way: signed_up (signed-up status), first_seen / last_seen (dates), total_sessions (engagement depth), and any custom user properties (user_var_string, user_var_int, etc.) set via setUserProperties — e.g. plan type or account ID. Build one metric and one segment per cohort, then compute each cohort in sequence: attach the segment via fullstory:update_metric(metric_id, segment_id), call fullstory:compute_metric(metric_id), store the result, then repeat with the next segment. Present the results side by side. Do not pass segment_id directly to fullstory:compute_metric.

Example: "do enterprise users experience more errors than free users?" → build two segments (enterprise, free), build one metric (errors), compute twice.

To refine a cohort after it's been built (e.g., "also exclude trial users from the free segment"), use fullstory:update_segment with the existing segment_definition rather than rebuilding with fullstory:build_segment.

Using top_n dimensionality for user properties is valid if you specifically want point-in-time values — each event is attributed to the user property value at the moment it fired. If a user changed plan tier mid-period, their events will be split across both values. For most comparisons you want the canonical (current) value, which is why segments are the default choice.

Decision table

Comparison axisTypeMechanism
Device type, browser, OSEvent propertyDimensionality
Page URL, elementEvent propertyDimensionality
signed_up, first_seen, last_seenUser propertySegments
total_sessionsUser propertySegments
user_var_* (custom user properties)User propertySegments

If you can't tell whether a property is event-level or user-level, default to dimensionality — it's more precise and uses fewer API calls.

Why the wrong choice produces wrong results

Segments for event properties (the temporal scope problem): A segment matches users by their canonical properties, then includes all of that user's events. Alice uses both mobile and desktop during a 30-day window. She rage-clicks 5 times — all on desktop. With a "mobile users" segment, Alice qualifies (she used mobile once), so all 5 desktop rage clicks inflate the mobile count. With a device-type dimension, each rage click is tagged with the device it actually fired on — all 5 go to desktop, zero to mobile.

Dimensionality for user properties (the split-value problem): Bob was on the free plan for two weeks, then upgraded to enterprise. Using top_n grouped by plan tier, his events split — two weeks of errors under "free", two weeks under "enterprise". If the question was "do enterprise users see more errors?", Bob's pre-upgrade errors are excluded from the enterprise count. With segments, Bob's canonical value is "enterprise" (last known), so all his events count toward the enterprise cohort.

來源與署名

來源:fullstorydev/fullstory-skills位於skills/comparisons提交b20614e

授權條款: 無授權條款

內容歸原作者所有。SourceWeft 從公開儲存庫中收錄這些內容。

檢舉或申請下架