makerpeak
分析 · 55.7K 月間訪問数
makerpeakは、インディーハッカー、ソロプレナー、メイカーのためのオールインワンプラットフォームです。プロジェクト管理、リアルタイムのビジネス分析（MRR、解約率）、ユーザーフィードバック、変更履歴を一つの直感的なダッシュボードに統合します。複数のツールを使い分ける手間を省き、プロジェクトの構築と成長に集中できます。
VS
Screenful
分析 · 17K 月間訪問数
Screenfulは、アジャイルチーム向けの生産性分析プラットフォームで、進捗報告を自動化します。Jira、Trello、Asanaなどのプロジェクト管理ツールからのデータを視覚化し、チームがベロシティ、リードタイム/サイクルタイム、スループットなどの主要なメトリクスを追跡できるようにします。これにより、ボトルネックを特定し、ワークフローを改善し、データに基づいた意思決定を行うことができます。カスタマイズ可能なダッシュボード、既製のテンプレート、自動レポートにより、Screenfulはチームのパフォーマンスとプロジェクトのデリバリーを向上させるための実用的なインサイトを提供します。
製品概要
makerpeak 製品概要
makerpeakは、インディーハッカー、ソロプレナー、メイカーのためのオールインワンプラットフォームです。プロジェクト管理、リアルタイムのビジネス分析（MRR、解約率）、ユーザーフィードバック、変更履歴を一つの直感的なダッシュボードに統合します。複数のツールを使い分ける手間を省き、プロジェクトの構築と成長に集中できます。
Preview
Screenful 製品概要
Screenfulは、アジャイルチーム向けの生産性分析プラットフォームで、進捗報告を自動化します。Jira、Trello、Asanaなどのプロジェクト管理ツールからのデータを視覚化し、チームがベロシティ、リードタイム/サイクルタイム、スループットなどの主要なメトリクスを追跡できるようにします。これにより、ボトルネックを特定し、ワークフローを改善し、データに基づいた意思決定を行うことができます。カスタマイズ可能なダッシュボード、既製のテンプレート、自動レポートにより、Screenfulはチームのパフォーマンスとプロジェクトのデリバリーを向上させるための実用的なインサイトを提供します。
Preview
Detailed feature comparison
makerpeak vs Screenful monthly traffic
Compare makerpeak and Screenful by monthly reach, traffic trend, visit depth, top regions, and acquisition sources.
How to interpret the traffic data
In the makerpeak vs Screenful monthly traffic comparison, makerpeak currently shows 55.7K visits and Screenful shows 17K; makerpeak has about 3.3 times the visible traffic of Screenful, an absolute difference of about 38.7K visits. This reflects visible reach, not feature quality or paid users.
Only Screenful has complete third-party traffic details; makerpeak uses visits recorded inside ToolMage. These scopes cannot estimate market share directly, and on-site views should not be treated as the product’s total website traffic.
makerpeak is registered at the x.com/marvr_ subpage. Because the current data does not state whether other host pages are excluded, treat this as domain-level context rather than independent traffic for one product or project.
makerpeak monthly traffic:
Latest traffic
月間訪問数
55.7K
Screenful monthly traffic:
Latest traffic
月間訪問数
17K
平均滞在時間
0:34
訪問あたりページ数
1.77
直帰率
44.93%
Data updated 2026-06-15
Monthly traffic trend
- 2025/9: 17K 月間訪問数
- 2026/1: 25.5K 月間訪問数
- 2026/2: 15K 月間訪問数
- 2026/3: 17.7K 月間訪問数
- 2026/4: 15.7K 月間訪問数
- 2026/5: 17K 月間訪問数
主要地域
Top 5 countries/regions
| Country/region | Percentage | Traffic |
|---|---|---|
| 🇺🇸United States | 66.96% | 11.4K |
| 🇩🇪Germany | 15.03% | 2.6K |
| 🇷🇺Russia | 6.58% | 1.1K |
| 🇧🇷Brazil | 6.22% | 1.1K |
| 🇬🇧United Kingdom | 5.21% | 888 |
流入元
| Source type | Percentage | Traffic |
|---|---|---|
| ダイレクト | 57.17% | 9.7K |
| 参照元 | 32.37% | 5.5K |
| Eメール | 10.46% | 1.8K |
検索キーワード
github projects how to backdate the burndown chartgitlab tokentools to get github insightstrello effort fieldtrello set card widths
Traffic-based selection guidance: makerpeak is registered under a x.com subpath, so its large visible total may include the host platform. The current data does not justify choosing makerpeak for traffic alone; shortlist by unique taxonomy and use case, then validate with the same tasks.
Usage comparison
Compare the core capabilities of makerpeak and Screenful
makerpeak Core features
分析
プロジェクト管理
ダッシュボード
Screenful Core features
分析
プロジェクト管理
DevOps
Use cases
makerpeak Use cases
ダッシュボード
プロジェクト管理
アナリティクス
公開で構築
インディーハッカー
MRRトラッカー
生産性
SaaS
1人起業家
スタートアップツール
Screenful Use cases
ダッシュボード
プロジェクト管理
アジャイルメトリクス
アサナ
データ視覚化
ジラ
看板
生産性分析
レポート自動化
スクラム
トレロ
makerpeak vs Screenful：In-depth comparison and selection guidance
First decide whether the products solve the same kind of need
This in-depth makerpeak vs Screenful comparison uses only the product records, taxonomy, audience, traffic, and community signals available on this page. makerpeak is primarily listed under “分析”, while Screenful is primarily listed under “分析”, so the first decision is whether your actual task matches their recorded scope.
The structured fields currently show these decision-relevant differences: Monthly visits (makerpeak: 55.7K; Screenful: 17K); Favorites (makerpeak: 113; Screenful: 86); Website (makerpeak: x.com; Screenful: screenful.com); Added (makerpeak: 2025-08-15; Screenful: 2025-08-11). These facts are more useful for selection than brand visibility alone.
What market visibility and monthly traffic mean
In the makerpeak vs Screenful monthly traffic comparison, makerpeak currently shows 55.7K visits and Screenful shows 17K; makerpeak has about 3.3 times the visible traffic of Screenful, an absolute difference of about 38.7K visits. This reflects visible reach, not feature quality or paid users.
Only Screenful has complete third-party traffic details; makerpeak uses visits recorded inside ToolMage. These scopes cannot estimate market share directly, and on-site views should not be treated as the product’s total website traffic.
makerpeak is registered at the x.com/marvr_ subpage. Because the current data does not state whether other host pages are excluded, treat this as domain-level context rather than independent traffic for one product or project.
makerpeak is registered under a x.com subpath, so its large visible total may include the host platform. The current data does not justify choosing makerpeak for traffic alone; shortlist by unique taxonomy and use case, then validate with the same tasks.
Product positioning, use cases, and roles
makerpeak and Screenful currently overlap in shared categories: 分析、プロジェクト管理; shared tags: ダッシュボード、プロジェクト管理. This can place both on the same shortlist, but it does not prove equal implementation, depth, or cost.
makerpeak's unique categories/tags are ダッシュボード、アナリティクス、公開で構築、インディーハッカー、MRRトラッカー、生産性、SaaS、1人起業家; Screenful's are DevOps、アジャイルメトリクス、アサナ、データ視覚化、ジラ、看板、生産性分析、レポート自動化. These unique fields are the strongest differentiators: validate the product whose recorded scope matches the task instead of following traffic alone.
What ratings, comments, and favorites can tell you
makerpeak has no verified rating, 0 comments, 113 favorites, and 106 likes；Screenful has no verified rating, 0 comments, 86 favorites, and 87 likes。
Neither product has enough rating or comment samples for a credible reputation ranking.
Selection guidance by actual need
When to evaluate makerpeak first
Put makerpeak on the priority trial list when the task aligns with “分析” and especially ダッシュボード、アナリティクス、公開で構築、インディーハッカー、MRRトラッカー、生産性. This follows recorded positioning and does not imply unlisted capabilities are absent.
makerpeak also currently records: pricing is freemium, product type is website, 55.7K on-site monthly views, no verified user rating. Verify any hard requirement around price, platform, or reach before trial, and do not let sparse review data substitute for testing.
When to evaluate Screenful first
Put Screenful on the priority trial list when the task aligns with “分析” and especially DevOps、アジャイルメトリクス、アサナ、データ視覚化、ジラ、看板. This follows recorded positioning and does not imply unlisted capabilities are absent.
Screenful also currently records: pricing is freemium, product type is website, 17K verified monthly visits, no verified user rating. Verify any hard requirement around price, platform, or reach before trial, and do not let sparse review data substitute for testing.
How to validate the recommendation before deciding
The available data describes positioning, public visibility, and community signals, but it cannot prove output quality, speed, integration effort, privacy, or long-term cost in your workflow. Before deciding, run the same representative tasks in makerpeak and Screenful, then record completion time, accuracy, manual corrections, and the real paid threshold. A like-for-like trial turns this comparison into a defensible adoption decision.
比較 FAQ
How should I choose between makerpeak and Screenful?
Compare positioning, pricing, taxonomy, and traffic maturity, then verify the latest details on each official website.
Where does this comparison data come from?
The factual baseline is derived from product, taxonomy, traffic, and community data. Reviewed editorial conclusions show their source and verification date.
What do unknown fields mean?
Unknown means there is not enough reliable evidence; the page does not fill gaps with assumptions.