
I have switched to Count for all the analysis I run, so I would say I use it on a daily-basis.
With Count, you can have queries, plots, text, reports, and comments all in the same place. I find this extremely valuable, as it effectively makes everything self-documenting: the queries that support the results, the interpretation, and the reviews that were made all live together. Moreover, we can collaborate in real-time on the same canvas, which is amazing.
I really like that Count allows you to create tiles and reference results, in a way that feels similar to a DAG in dbt. This helps avoid a lot of code duplication and significantly streamlines query creation. Personally, I think this makes a big difference because it allows me to split complex queries into clearly defined components and then combine their results as needed.
When using other tools, I sometimes felt constrained by the lack of flexible filtering, which was often managed at the organization level and pushed me toward hacky solutions. With Count, control cells make it easy to implement the exact filters you need, giving you a lot of freedom and power to build very flexible dashboards.
Finally, I think the Count support team is excellent. They are consistently helpful, whether I’m stuck or just looking for best practices to implement something in the tool. They either provide a solution or take note of the feedback to improve the product. A good example is the recent addition of support for different scales in facet plots, which addressed a limitation I personally encountered. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
Regarding areas for improvement, I do have a few ideas.
I think the construction of frames could live in a separate canvas, similar to how Tableau approaches dashboards. This would offer the best of both worlds: plots would remain close to the queries that generate their data, while still allowing the creation of a dedicated dashboard that brings everything together.
There are also some smaller usability issues that can make the interface feel unintuitive at times. For example, when creating custom plots, individual marks cannot be named, which makes it harder to understand what each mark represents. Similarly, when multiple marks are used, it’s not always clear which variable is assigned to the secondary axis.
Some solutions also feel a bit hacky—for instance, adding vertical lines to indicate events by using bar plots, where it’s not always obvious how to control the bar width cleanly.
Overall, these are relatively minor points. They don’t slow me down in my day-to-day work, and I see them more as a wishlist than as real blockers. As with any tool, there is always room for improvement—but Count is already a superb product. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.
The reviewer uploaded a screenshot or submitted the review in-app verifying them as current user.
Validated through Google using a business email account
Organic review. This review was written entirely without invitation or incentive from G2, a seller, or an affiliate.


