PhotoMetrix PRO

Developer: Gilson Augusto Helfer

Category: Education

10.5K installs

Ratings not yet available

+4 weekly installs

trend steady

+126 monthly installs

trend steady

ASO Keyword Dashboard

Tracking 51 keywords for PhotoMetrix PRO in Google Play

Developer: Gilson Augusto Helfer Category: education

PhotoMetrix PRO tracks 51 keywords (no keywords rank yet; 51 need traction). Key metrics: opportunity 69.6, difficulty 49.0.

Colorimetric analysis in mobile devices [ http://goo.gl/WOuvGZ ]

Tracked keywords

0 ranked • 51 not ranking yet

Top 10 coverage

—

Best rank — • Latest leader —

Avg opportunity

69.6

Top keyword: analysis

Avg difficulty

49.0

Lower scores indicate easier wins

Opportunity leaders

analysis

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 44.9 • Rank —

Competitors: 737
68.1
moment

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 51.3 • Rank —

Competitors: 1,419
69.9
channels

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 62.1 • Rank —

Competitors: 873
65.1
applications

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 55.2 • Rank —

Competitors: 1,198
70.8
mail

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 44.7 • Rank —

Competitors: 847
67.2

Unranked opportunities

analysis

Opportunity: 73.0 • Difficulty: 44.9 • Competitors: 737
moment

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 51.3 • Competitors: 1,419
channels

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 62.1 • Competitors: 873
applications

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 55.2 • Competitors: 1,198
mail

Opportunity: 72.0 • Difficulty: 44.7 • Competitors: 847

High competition keywords

using

Total apps: 114,758 • Major competitors: 13,323

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 64.0
mobile

Total apps: 113,294 • Major competitors: 10,537

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 60.5
available

Total apps: 92,463 • Major competitors: 9,952

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 66.4
various

Total apps: 74,125 • Major competitors: 9,464

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 57.7
data

Total apps: 68,455 • Major competitors: 6,589

Latest rank: — • Difficulty: 65.4

All tracked keywords

Includes opportunity, difficulty, rankings and competitor benchmarks

							Major Competitors
single	69	100	56	77 32,754 competing apps Median installs: 37,118 Avg rating: 2.9	—	—	3,952 major competitor apps
order	68	100	55	79 44,242 competing apps Median installs: 25,117 Avg rating: 2.7	—	—	4,188 major competitor apps
device	68	100	72	81 52,389 competing apps Median installs: 37,519 Avg rating: 3.0	—	—	6,390 major competitor apps
used	67	100	61	82 61,233 competing apps Median installs: 32,225 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	5,711 major competitor apps
image	70	100	54	76 27,195 competing apps Median installs: 35,290 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	3,073 major competitor apps
created	70	100	51	76 26,487 competing apps Median installs: 29,378 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	2,330 major competitor apps
using	65	100	64	86 114,758 competing apps Median installs: 37,480 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	13,323 major competitor apps
available	66	100	66	85 92,463 competing apps Median installs: 34,120 Avg rating: 2.9	—	—	9,952 major competitor apps
mobile	65	100	60	86 113,294 competing apps Median installs: 25,796 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	10,537 major competitor apps
various	67	100	58	83 74,125 competing apps Median installs: 40,134 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	9,464 major competitor apps
moment	72	100	51	70 12,376 competing apps Median installs: 36,206 Avg rating: 2.9	—	—	1,419 major competitor apps
ios	71	100	62	60 3,097 competing apps Median installs: 35,027 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	335 major competitor apps
color	69	100	55	77 30,080 competing apps Median installs: 44,962 Avg rating: 3.2	—	—	4,272 major competitor apps
devices	70	100	67	75 25,598 competing apps Median installs: 36,807 Avg rating: 3.0	—	—	3,146 major competitor apps
camera	71	100	65	74 20,516 competing apps Median installs: 56,900 Avg rating: 2.9	—	—	3,286 major competitor apps
statistical	70	100	33	53 1,215 competing apps Median installs: 23,310 Avg rating: 2.4	—	—	75 major competitor apps
possible	70	100	53	75 23,344 competing apps Median installs: 31,057 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	2,330 major competitor apps
data	67	100	65	83 68,455 competing apps Median installs: 26,834 Avg rating: 2.7	—	—	6,589 major competitor apps
main	69	100	53	77 32,327 competing apps Median installs: 33,651 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	3,349 major competitor apps
channels	72	100	62	65 6,469 competing apps Median installs: 45,176 Avg rating: 2.7	—	—	873 major competitor apps
component	69	100	71	51 990 competing apps Median installs: 26,118 Avg rating: 2.9	—	—	109 major competitor apps
obtained	71	100	39	60 3,068 competing apps Median installs: 32,394 Avg rating: 2.6	—	—	255 major competitor apps
send	68	100	62	80 45,966 competing apps Median installs: 36,716 Avg rating: 2.9	—	—	5,277 major competitor apps
results	71	100	50	74 20,368 competing apps Median installs: 27,098 Avg rating: 2.7	—	—	1,684 major competitor apps
apart	71	100	40	59 2,861 competing apps Median installs: 31,379 Avg rating: 2.8	—	—	295 major competitor apps

App Description

Colorimetric analysis in mobile devices [ http://goo.gl/WOuvGZ ]

This app was created in 2014 and employs Single Linear Correlation technics for univariate analysis, Principal Component Analysis (PCA) and HCA for multivariate exploratory analysis and Partial Least Squares (PLS) for multivariate calibration. The image data are acquired using the device main camera and converted in RGB histograms. In addition, apart color channels of RGB, HSV, HSL and HSI systems are used during the univariate and multivariate processing. It is possible to send by e-mail the image data, analysis data and charts. In order to validate the obtained results, the same sets of data were tested using Microsoft Excel© and ChemoStat©. The results in both applications coincided in various combinations.
This app calculates: eigenvalues, eigenvectors, scores, loadings, latent variables, RMSEP, REMSEC, REMSECV using Singular Value Decomposition and other statistical methods in Multivariate Analysis .
Also calculates: slope (span), intercept (off-set) and regression (Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient) in Univariate Calibration Analysis.

Also available in iOS and Windows Phone.

https://dx.doi.org/10.5935/0103-5053.20160182
https://doi.org/10.1002/cem.3251