--- title: "GrowthBook vs Landtest for A/B Testing a Next.js Landing Page" description: "Two very different answers to the same question — GrowthBook gives you an open-source platform to run yourself, Landtest runs the split through your GitHub deploy pipeline instead." canonical: https://landtest.dev/blog/growthbook-vs-landtest last-updated: 2026-10-30 --- # GrowthBook vs Landtest for A/B Testing a Next.js Landing Page > Two very different answers to the same question — GrowthBook gives you an open-source platform to run yourself, Landtest runs the split through your GitHub deploy pipeline instead. GrowthBook is an open-source, self-hostable experimentation platform where you run the split logic yourself, usually in `middleware.ts` or a server component, against your own data warehouse. Landtest is a GitHub-native A/B testing tool where the AI generates the variant as a branch, the split runs through your existing deploy pipeline instead of app-level middleware, and the losing variant is removed in a single PR when you call a winner. They solve overlapping problems with opposite architectures: GrowthBook hands you a platform, Landtest hands you a workflow. This is Landtest's own comparison — written honestly, with sources linked so you can check the GrowthBook claims yourself. Last updated 2026-09-30. ## What GrowthBook does well GrowthBook is free to self-host under the MIT license, with no artificial limits on seats, experiments, or events — you pay for your own infrastructure and nothing else. It's warehouse-native, meaning experiment analysis reads from your existing data warehouse rather than a proprietary event pipeline, which matters if you already have a BigQuery or Snowflake setup you trust more than a vendor's ingest. It's also general-purpose: feature flags, backend rollouts, and landing page splits all run through the same platform, so teams that need flagging beyond marketing pages get one system instead of several. [GrowthBook's own site](https://www.growthbook.io) documents the self-hosted deployment path in detail. ## Where the two diverge **Where the split logic lives.** GrowthBook's Next.js integration typically means a flag check in `middleware.ts` or a server component — code you write, own, and maintain in your app for as long as the experiment runs, and often longer if cleanup is manual. Landtest's split happens at the hosting/deploy layer against your repo's branches, so nothing about the test lives inside your application's request-handling code. See [how to A/B test without middleware conflicts](/blog/ab-test-nextjs-landing-page-without-middleware-conflicts) for why that distinction matters if you're also running Clerk or NextAuth middleware. **Who writes the variant.** GrowthBook assumes you've already built variant B — it's a targeting and measurement layer, not a code generator. Landtest's AI generates the variant as a branch against your actual codebase, then gives you a live preview to review before it ever sees traffic. **Stats methodology.** Both platforms avoid naive z-tests. GrowthBook supports Bayesian and frequentist sequential analysis depending on configuration. Landtest uses mSPRT with sequential testing and SRM (sample ratio mismatch) checks by default, so a skewed traffic split gets flagged automatically rather than silently corrupting results. **What's left when the test ends.** With GrowthBook, cleanup means manually removing the flag check and the losing code path from your app. With Landtest, declaring a winner produces a PR that strips the beacon, the split config, and the losing branch, back to a bare `page.tsx`. ## Which one to pick Choose GrowthBook if you need feature flagging beyond landing pages, you're comfortable owning middleware composition, and you want a platform you control end to end on your own infrastructure. Choose Landtest if the test is scoped to a landing page, you'd rather the variant get generated and reviewed as a PR than hand-built, and you want zero experiment logic left in your codebase once a winner is declared. They're not mutually exclusive — some teams run GrowthBook for backend flags and use Landtest specifically for landing page copy/layout tests where a PR-based workflow fits better than a flag check. ## FAQ **Can I use GrowthBook and Landtest together?** Yes. They don't share infrastructure, so there's no conflict running GrowthBook for feature flags elsewhere in your app while using Landtest for a landing page experiment. **Does GrowthBook require self-hosting?** No — GrowthBook Cloud is available with a free tier for up to three users. Self-hosting is optional but is the reason many teams pick GrowthBook over closed SaaS competitors. **Does Landtest require a data warehouse?** No. Landtest's analytics ingest and dashboard are self-contained — there's no warehouse setup required before you can run a test. --- Related: [GrowthBook alternatives for Next.js developers](/blog/growthbook-alternatives-nextjs) · [Best A/B testing tools for Next.js developers](/blog/best-ab-testing-tools-nextjs-developers) · [Landtest for A/B testing](/ab-testing)