Is PreTestAds a good Realeyes alternative?

For iteration-speed attention screening, yes — no panels, minutes per test, per-credit pricing, first analysis free. Realeyes remains the stronger choice when human-observed validation of finished creative is required.

What is the difference between PreTestAds and Realeyes?

Realeyes measures real panelists' attention through webcams — observed behavior, panel logistics, per-study economics. PreTestAds predicts engagement with a model trained on fMRI brain data — no recruitment, minutes turnaround, benchmarked against top TikTok ads.

Is predicted attention accurate enough to act on?

As a screening instrument, yes: the model was trained on real brain responses and benchmarked against real top-performing ads, and the percentile spread between weak and strong creative is large. Treat it as a screen that ranks and diagnoses — validate finalists with humans when stakes demand it.

Comparison

PreTestAds vs Realeyes

Realeyes and PreTestAds agree on the thesis — attention is the metric that gates everything else — and disagree on the instrument. Realeyes measures real humans watching through their webcams. PreTestAds predicts the human response with a model trained on brain data. Observation versus prediction.

What Realeyes does well

Realeyes pioneered webcam-based attention and emotion measurement: panelists opt in, watch your ad, and computer vision reads where their attention and expressions actually go. It's behavioral ground truth — real disengagement from real people, aggregated into attention scores used by major platforms and advertisers. When stakeholders need "humans actually watched this," observation carries a weight prediction can't match.

What PreTestAds does well

PreTestAds skips recruitment entirely. AdCortex™ was trained on fMRI recordings of brains responding to video — it predicts the engagement response instead of collecting it, returning a percentile score against 76 top TikTok performers, Hook Strength, drop-off timing, and the full curve in minutes. No panel windows, no per-study fieldwork costs, no minimum spend: which is what makes it viable to score every single variation you generate rather than the two you can afford to field.

When observation wins, and when it can't

Observation is the stronger evidence for a finished hero asset — it's real behavior. But observation can't iterate at creative speed: every new cut means another panel, another wait, another invoice. Prediction inverts the economics — the marginal test costs a credit and arrives before your coffee cools — which changes behavior: teams actually test every refresh, every hook variant, every opening-seconds experiment, instead of reserving testing for special occasions.

Which should you choose?

Choose Realeyes when you need human-observed validation on high-stakes finished creative, or platform-grade attention measurement across campaigns. Choose PreTestAds when iteration speed is the constraint — daily creative decisions, AI-generated batches, lean budgets — and the question is "which of these twelve cuts deserves to exist?" Screen with the model; validate the winner with humans if the stakes justify it.

Test at prediction speed

Score a cut in minutes, iterate, and re-score — first analysis free.

Test Your Ad Free