Loading content…
1. Listing metadata
Field-level data| ACF | impact.com Affiliate Marketing | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | ||
| Last updated | — | — |
| ACF | impact.com Affiliate Marketing | |
|---|---|---|
| Tagline | ||
| Description | ||
| Screenshots | images | images |
| Languages | ||
| Platforms | ||
| Developer | ||
| Listed | ||
| Last updated | — | — |
Drive more sales and acquire new customers with affiliate marketing.
| Metric | ACF: Metafields Custom Fields | impact.com Affiliate Marketing |
|---|---|---|
| Rating | 4.5 ★ | 4.5 ★ |
| Total reviews | 90 | ★ 198 |
| Free plan | Yes | Yes |
| Pricing | Free to install | Free trial available |
| Built for Shopify | — | — |
| Pricing tiers | 3 tiers | 3 tiers |
| Listed features | 4 | ★ 5 |
| Featured placements | — | 1 |
| Languages | 1 supported | 1 supported |
| Listed since | Dec 2019 | Jun 2020 |
ACF: Metafields Custom Fields and impact.com Affiliate Marketing are evenly matched on rating (4.5★ vs 4.5★) — the differentiator comes down to pricing fit, feature breadth, and which app's interaction pattern suits your team's workflow. Pricing entry tiers: ACF: Metafields Custom Fields at Free to install, impact.com Affiliate Marketing at Free trial available. Check each app's tier structure for the capacity limits you actually need before deciding — the headline number is the same shape, but the gating shape per tier (apps, orders, integrations) varies. impact.com Affiliate Marketing has the larger user base (198 reviews vs 90), which usually maps to broader integration coverage, faster bug-fix cadence, and a deeper bench of community workflow patterns. ACF: Metafields Custom Fields's smaller cohort can be an advantage for niche workflows where the bigger app has accumulated bloat. Recommended evaluation path: install both apps' free tiers (where available) and run them in parallel on a small cohort of orders for 7-14 days before committing. The data tables below show the per-feature breakdown — for most merchants the deciding factor will be a single integration or workflow detail that's hard to compare from listing pages alone. This verdict is generated from the live marketplace data on this page — rating, review count, pricing tier, and category position all refresh from the canonical Shopify App Store listing every 24 hours. AppRanks does not accept payment to influence comparison outcomes; the methodology is documented on the About page and applies identically to every pair on the site.
Read each app's audit: ACF: Metafields Custom Fields audit • impact.com Affiliate Marketing audit
| Keyword | ACF | impact.com Affiliate Marketing |
|---|---|---|
| metafields | #5 | Not ranked |
| metafield | #5 | Not ranked |
| affiliate marketing | Not ranked | #9 |
| affiliate programs | Not ranked | #12 |
| custom fields | #13 | Not ranked |
Not featured in any section recently.
Both ACF: Metafields Custom Fields and impact.com Affiliate Marketing offer paid plans only. ACF: Metafields Custom Fields starts at Free to install; impact.com Affiliate Marketing starts at Free trial available. Compare the per-tier features in the Pricing section above before committing.
ACF: Metafields Custom Fields (4.5★, 90 reviews) and impact.com Affiliate Marketing (4.5★, 198 reviews) are essentially tied on rating. Look at review velocity and individual reviewer quotes — both visible on each app's detail page — to differentiate.
It depends on what you're optimizing for. ACF: Metafields Custom Fields fits better if you prioritize broader integrations; impact.com Affiliate Marketing is the call if you need the larger user base. Read both apps' detail pages on AppRanks for the full feature breakdown, install counts, and recent listing changes.
Both apps are one-click installs from the Shopify App Store marketplace. impact.com Affiliate Marketing has more onboarding documentation maturity (198 reviews vs 90), which usually translates to better-tested setup wizards and quicker time-to-value. AppRanks doesn't measure setup time directly — read the recent reviews on each app's detail page for merchant-reported install experience.
ACF: Metafields Custom Fields typically suits early-stage and growth-mode stores based on its review-base composition (90 reviews). impact.com Affiliate Marketing aligns more with early-stage and growth-mode stores (198 reviews). Larger review bases generally mean the app has been load-tested at scale — relevant if you're processing high order volume or handling enterprise compliance requirements.
Migration support varies by app and category. ACF: Metafields Custom Fields and impact.com Affiliate Marketing both publish their export options on their marketplace listing pages (or in their support docs); some apps offer one-click import from competitors, others require CSV. The fastest check: search "import from ACF: Metafields Custom Fields" in each app's help center. AppRanks does not track migration tooling directly — this is a category-specific capability worth verifying before commitment.
