Softwr

Marketing · head to head

Optimove vs Roxhill

Optimove logo

Optimove

Marketing

Retention marketing platform that forces control groups and reports uplift per customer

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite
Roxhill logo

Roxhill

Marketing

UK-focused journalist database and media monitoring, founder-owned and annual only

From
On request
Rated
-
Full reviewWebsite

The short version

  • Each has a real cost: Optimove it requires a customer-level data feed with transactions before it does anything useful, and mapping that feed typically takes weeks of joint work rather than days.; Roxhill the database is UK-centric by reviewers’ own account, with weak US, Australian and broader Asian journalist coverage, so any multi-market programme needs a second vendor and the single-vendor cost case disappears.
  • They diverge on capability: Optimove covers Customer modelling, Roxhill covers Journalist database.
  • Prices and features above were last checked on 31 August 2026.

Where they differ

Only the attributes on which Optimove and Roxhill actually diverge.

Attributes where Optimove and Roxhill differ
AttributeOptimoveRoxhill
PlatformsWeb, iOS, Android, REST APIWeb, iOS, Android

Identical on both: starting price (On request), pricing model (quote), free tier (No), user rating (Not yet rated), category (Marketing).

What each one covers

Drawn from each product's published feature list. An absence here means we hold no record of it - not that the product lacks it.

Only in Optimove

  • Customer modelling
  • Mandatory control groups
  • Optibot
  • Multichannel orchestration
  • Self-optimising campaigns
  • Realtime triggers

Only in Roxhill

  • Journalist database
  • Journalist profiles
  • Media lists and distribution
  • Media requests and alerts
  • Media monitoring
  • Bespoke newsletters
  • Historical search
  • Journalist Assistant

What people use each for

The jobs each tool is most often brought in to do.

Optimove

  • An operator that has to prove incremental revenue from retention marketing to a finance committeenot Roxhill
  • Segmenting a customer base by predicted value and lifecycle stage rather than by campaign list membershipnot Roxhill
  • Running hundreds of small always-on campaigns where per-campaign uplift decides which survivenot Roxhill
  • Coordinating retention messaging with paid audience suppression so lapsed customers are not paid for twicenot Roxhill

Roxhill

  • A UK in-house press office that needs journalist contacts with current pitching preferences rather than a scraped byline list.not Optimove
  • An agency tracking forward features across UK trade and consumer titles to place clients into planned coverage months ahead.not Optimove
  • A communications team monitoring named spokespeople and measuring their share of voice against competitors in UK media.not Optimove
  • A UK public sector body procuring through G-Cloud that needs EEA-hosted media monitoring with a published framework price band.not Optimove

Where each one falls short

Documented limitations, not opinions. Every one is a constraint you would hit in normal use.

Optimove

  • It requires a customer-level data feed with transactions before it does anything useful, and mapping that feed typically takes weeks of joint work rather than days.
  • Pricing is based on tracked customers, so an inflated database of accounts that will never return costs money exactly like an unpruned email list does.
  • The modelling layer is largely opaque, so when a lifecycle stage assignment looks wrong there is limited ability to inspect why beyond vendor support.
  • The interface is dense and built for daily operators, and occasional users typically never become independent in it.
  • Email delivery is through bundled or third-party sending infrastructure rather than an in-house ESP, which adds a party to any deliverability investigation.

Roxhill

  • The database is UK-centric by reviewers’ own account, with weak US, Australian and broader Asian journalist coverage, so any multi-market programme needs a second vendor and the single-vendor cost case disappears.
  • Contact records go stale: reviewers report old email addresses and phone numbers, distribution bounces, and there is no self-serve verification step before you send.
  • At roughly 200,000 to 300,000 journalists it is far smaller than the million-plus figures Cision and Prowly claim, with repeated complaints about thin trade, academic and journal coverage.
  • Selling is annual only with no monthly plan and a trial functionally restricted to around two weeks, so you cannot genuinely pilot before a twelve-month commitment, which is a poor fit for project or retainer agency work.
  • Licence bands are 1, 3 and 5 seats, and extra logins, workspaces, smart folders, historical search, share of voice and the spokespeople platform are all chargeable add-ons, so a team of eight to fifteen pays well above any headline band.
  • Search behaviour is described as counter-intuitive and sometimes returns implausibly few results, which means a null result cannot be trusted and lists need manual cross-checking.
  • Monitoring accuracy takes time to settle after switching, so coverage is missed in the first weeks after a cutover, which is a real gap risk if you time the migration badly.

Pricing, plan by plan

Optimove

On request
  • Optimove$undefined/year
    • Priced by number of tracked customers
    • Channel modules and Kumulos-derived mobile messaging licensed separately
    • Annual contract including onboarding services

Roxhill

On request
  • Core$undefined/year
    • 1 licence
    • Standard database access
    • Journalist Assistant
  • Boutique$undefined/year
    • 3 licences
    • Adds press release distribution
    • 3 workspaces, 6 smart folders, 10 spokespeople, 3 newsletters
  • Enterprise$undefined/year
    • 5 licences
    • 5 workspaces, 10 smart folders, 5 newsletters
    • Spokespeople platform
  • Premium$undefined/year
    • Everything in Enterprise
    • Insights analysis and bespoke reporting
    • Competitor share of voice

Which should you pick?

Choose Optimove if

  • You need customer modelling.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android, REST API.
  • You also want mandatory control groups.
Optimove review

Choose Roxhill if

  • You need journalist database.
  • You work on Web, iOS, Android.
  • You also want journalist profiles.
Roxhill review

Questions people ask

Is Optimove or Roxhill better?
Neither clearly leads. Optimove starts at On request and Roxhill at On request, and user ratings are close enough to be indistinguishable. Choose on capability and platform support.
Which is cheaper, Optimove or Roxhill?
Optimove starts at On request and Roxhill at On request.
Does Optimove or Roxhill run on more platforms?
Optimove runs on Web, iOS, Android, REST API. Roxhill runs on Web, iOS, Android.
What is Optimove best used for?
Optimove is most often used for an operator that has to prove incremental revenue from retention marketing to a finance committee, segmenting a customer base by predicted value and lifecycle stage rather than by campaign list membership, running hundreds of small always-on campaigns where per-campaign uplift decides which survive, coordinating retention messaging with paid audience suppression so lapsed customers are not paid for twice. Of those, an operator that has to prove incremental revenue from retention marketing to a finance committee and segmenting a customer base by predicted value and lifecycle stage rather than by campaign list membership are not what Roxhill is typically brought in for.
What can Optimove do that Roxhill cannot?
Optimove covers Customer modelling, Mandatory control groups, Optibot, Multichannel orchestration. Roxhill covers Journalist database, Journalist profiles, Media lists and distribution, Media requests and alerts.

Answered from the vendors’ own pages

Optimove: Why does it insist on control groups?

Because uplift is the reported metric. Without a holdout the platform cannot attribute revenue, and the reporting that justifies the licence stops working.

Roxhill: How much does Roxhill cost?

Not published on the vendor site, but the UK G-Cloud 14 listing discloses £6,450 to £25,000 per instance per year. Use that as your anchor.

Optimove: Is it only for iGaming?

No, but that is where its density of customers and its default lifecycle models are strongest. Subscription retail and financial services are the other common verticals.

Roxhill: Is Roxhill owned by Cision or Access Intelligence?

No. Companies House shows a single individual holding over 75% of shares and no corporate PSC. It is founder-controlled and unfunded. Note the founder previously sold Gorkana to Cision, so ask for a change-of-control clause.

Optimove: Can it send email itself?

It orchestrates and personalises, then sends through connected delivery infrastructure. Deliverability remains a shared responsibility with that provider.

Roxhill: Is it usable for US or APAC media relations?

Not well. Reviewers describe US, Australian and Asian coverage as materially weaker than UK. Budget for a second database.

Roxhill: Can I buy monthly?

No. Contracts are annual, sales-gated, with a trial of around two weeks.

Share

Related pages

More on Optimove

More on Roxhill

Keep looking

Other head to heads