Pricing for 8 marketing-analytics SaaS products could not be compared by monthly fee

When I lined up the public prices of 8 marketing-analytics SaaS products, putting the monthly numbers in one row was not a comparison. The billing unit was scattered across customer count, data-source count, dashboard count, and store count, and the currencies were mixed: US dollars, euros, and yen.

I looked this up because I wanted to know where our monthly price sits in the market, but public prices alone could not answer that question. Here is what I could tell, and what I could not.

I am building Shoryaku AI ( https://shoryaku.net ), a marketing-support SaaS. When I first wrote this article, Standard was ¥4,980 a month, and I have since lowered the prices into 3 tiers (the reason is below). Paying customers are still zero.

Public prices of the 8 companies

This is what I confirmed by opening each company's pricing page. (As of September 4, 2026.) I did not convert currencies. Prices change, so look at each company's official page for the latest when you are considering them.

Why lining the monthly fees up is not a comparison

In the table above, there is not one monthly fee that means the same thing.

• AgencyAnalytics' $20 is per 1 customer. If an agency handles 10 companies, that becomes $200
• Swydo's €62 includes 10 data sources, and from the 11th each one adds €4.50
• DashThis' $44 is up to 3 dashboards and 15 data sources
• Gyro-n MEO's ¥1,500 is up to 1 store and 10 keywords
• Databox's $64 is up to 5 data sources

What differs is not how much per month, but what is counted as 1 unit. Ours is a flat fee per business, so the unit does not line up with any row in this table.

The currencies do not line up either. $, €, and ¥ are mixed, and some pairs differ only by enough that an exchange rate can reverse the order. This article does not convert them.

2 things could still be read.

1. The tier that is complete as self-service clusters at $20 to $64 a month (AgencyAnalytics / Supermetrics / DashThis / Databox). The units differ, but the entry price sits in this band
2. Above and below that, the way of selling changes. Gyro-n MEO at ¥1,500 is a single function. Whatagraph at €699 and WACUL at ¥200,000 a month assume a sales conversation or implementation support

Ours is a flat fee per business, priced in yen, so placing it on the lower side of this band makes it close per unit and cheaper in total. It is not the same thing at a lower price. AgencyAnalytics is $20/client and includes managing multiple customers and white label. Lining up things with different included scope by price alone is meaningless.

What public prices cannot tell you

Before I looked, I was reading it as "no competitor around ¥5,000 means the space is open." That is not something the public prices could say.

Too much cannot be confirmed from the public pages.

• Each company's ad spend, and customer acquisition cost by channel
• The conversion rate from free to paid, and the churn rate
• The actual average price (what it sells for after discounts)
• The actual amount of an individual quote (Whatagraph's Prime, Canly, and others)

So the reason there is no competitor in that price band cannot be decided from public information. The target customers may be narrow, the features offered may differ, or sales cost may be included in the price. Any of those is possible.

I calculated our own ad CAC separately

Apart from the competitors' situation, I estimated Google search ads on our own assumptions. The figures are against the monthly price of ¥4,980 at the time.

With ¥420 ÷ (3% × 15%), the estimated acquisition cost for 1 customer is about ¥93,000. The cost per click is from keyword candidates collected at the time. The 2 conversion rates are assumptions, not actual results. The 19 months is not a figure that guarantees churn or cash flow either.

What this estimate can say is only that a plan to acquire customers with ads, left on these assumptions, is heavy as an early move. It cannot say that SaaS in this price band cannot be sold with ads.

Cost is managed separately. The ceiling on AI cost is fixed at 25% of revenue (Manage AI SaaS cost from both actual usage and the monthly cap). Cost sets the floor of the price. It does not set the ceiling.

After that, I lowered the price

After publication I lowered the prices. I set Standard to ¥2,980 and Pro to ¥4,980, and added a Lite at ¥980 underneath.

The basis is not competitor prices. As written above, public prices could not fix where we sit. What changed was how we sell.

When the path changes so that people decide without a conversation, deciding on their own to pay ¥4,980 a month for a service they do not know is heavy. I did not move the price before measuring. I moved it because the role the price carries had changed.

While paying customers are 0 companies, there is also the fact that the cost of a price change is zero. There is no migration of existing contracts, and no announcement of a price cut is required. The judgment that if we are going to change it, this is the only time is part of the decision.

What to measure before setting a price

The public-price research did not become material for deciding our own price. Instead I measure the following.

1. The rate of proceeding from an article to a trial
2. The rate of people who tried it and reached the first analysis
3. The rate who proceed to paid at the monthly price at that point
4. Retention after 1 month and after 3 months
5. AI cost and support time per company

If someone says ¥980 is still expensive, treat that as a problem of value, not of price.

Summary

• The public prices of the 8 companies used different units, customer count, data-source count, dashboard count, and store count, and the monthly fees could not be lined up in one row
• Currencies are mixed: $ / € / ¥. No exchange-rate conversion was done
• What could be read stopped at 2 points: the self-service tier's entry clusters at $20 to $64, and above and below that the way of selling changes
• The reason there is no competitor cannot be pinned on CAC alone. Each company's acquisition cost and conversion rate are not public
• Our ad CAC is ¥93,333 on the assumptions, with payback in 19 months. This is our estimate, not a fact about the market
• The price was cut 8 days later, but the basis was a change in how we sell, not competitor prices

• Pricing
• SaaS
• Marketing
• Indie development