Not Another Logo Grader.
Real Science.
Most tools feed your logo to an AI and present its opinion as a score. We start with real computer vision measurements, run colorblind simulation, image quality assessment, color harmony analysis, and CLIP classification, then interpret through cognitive neuroscience and published research. The difference is measurable.
What Most Logo Tools Actually Do
The logo analysis market is dominated by tools that rely on a single approach: feed an image to an AI and present its opinion as a score.
AI Opinion as Score
Feed an image to a language model, get a number back. No underlying measurement. The score is whatever the model decides, with no verifiable basis.
3-12 Surface Metrics
Uniqueness matching against icon libraries. Basic contrast checks. Maybe some color harmony. That's the entire analysis — no depth, no science, no context.
No Real Science
No computer vision measurements. No colorblind simulation. No image quality assessment. No research frameworks. No brain science. Just a chatbot reviewing a picture.
The Comparison
What you get from typical logo analysis tools versus Logo Analyzer. The pattern is industry-wide.
| Capability | Logo Analyzer | Typical Logo Tools |
|---|---|---|
| Computer Vision | ||
| Bilateral symmetry measurement | Computed via pixel analysis | Not available |
| Shannon entropy complexity | Mathematically computed | Not available |
| Edge density analysis | Real CV measurement | Not available |
| Golden ratio proximity | Measured against phi (1.618) | Not available |
| WCAG contrast ratios (AA/AAA) | Computed per WCAG 2.1 | Basic contrast check or none |
| Eye Tracking & Attention | ||
| Saliency prediction model | DeepGaze IIE (MIT1003-trained) | Not available |
| Gaze path animation | Hybrid: saliency + AI semantic | Not available |
| Fixation duration per element | Per-element timing data | Not available |
| Attention heatmap | Saliency-based heatmap | Not available |
| Color Science | ||
| Color extraction with values | CV: hex/RGB/HSL + percentages | Basic palette or none |
| Mathematical color harmony | Harmony type detection + score | "Colors look good" |
| Palmer & Schloss preference data | 37 BCP colors, age/gender data | Not available |
| Kobayashi Color Image Scale | 180 image words mapping | Not available |
| Brain Science & Neuroscience | ||
| Brain region activation mapping | 6+ regions: PFC, amygdala, NAcc... | Not available |
| Brainwave band simulation | 5 bands: Delta through Gamma | Not available |
| Neurotransmitter predictions | Dopamine, serotonin, cortisol... | Not available |
| Temporal response timeline | Millisecond-by-millisecond | Not available |
| Accessibility | ||
| Colorblind simulation | 4 types: Brettel/Vienot matrices | Basic or none |
| Per-condition effectiveness score | Score + color loss percentage | Not available |
| Problematic color pair detection | Identified per condition | Not available |
| Image Quality Assessment | ||
| No-reference IQA algorithms | NIQE + BRISQUE + MUSIQ | Not available |
| Technical quality classification | Composite score + level | Not available |
| Research Frameworks | ||
| Brand personality model | Aaker 5-D (1997) radar chart | AI-generated personality text |
| CLIP zero-shot classification | OpenAI CLIP: industry, style, archetype | Not available |
| Multi-persona simulation | Demographic-specific personas | Single generic score |
| Output & Reporting | ||
| Total metrics produced | 224+ across 14 dimensions | 3-12 scores |
| PDF report | 33+ pages | None or 1-2 pages |
| Verification certificate | QR-coded, verifiable | Not available |
| Competitor benchmarking | Side-by-side metric comparison | Similarity detection or none |
| Data export | Full JSON + PDF + share links | None |
Capabilities No Other Tool Offers
Each of these is a real, measurable capability — not a marketing promise.
Real Computer Vision
Symmetry, entropy, edge density, golden ratio, contrast ratios — computed from pixels, not estimated by AI. These ground-truth measurements anchor every interpretation.
Colorblind Accessibility
Brettel/Vienot matrices simulate protanopia, deuteranopia, tritanopia, and achromatopsia. See your logo through the eyes of the 8% of men with color vision deficiency.
Brain Region Mapping
Prefrontal cortex, amygdala, nucleus accumbens, fusiform face area — we map activation across the neural structures that drive brand perception and purchase decisions.
Image Quality Science
NIQE, BRISQUE, and MUSIQ — three no-reference image quality algorithms assess technical quality without needing a perfect reference image.
CLIP Semantic Intelligence
OpenAI CLIP zero-shot classification identifies industry fit, design attributes, brand archetypes, and style tags — objective semantic understanding from a visual-language model.
Mathematical Color Harmony
Complementary, analogous, triadic, split-complementary, tetradic, and monochromatic — detected mathematically on the color wheel, not subjectively guessed.
Multi-Persona Simulation
Age, gender, digital habits, economic status, education, lifestyle — each persona evaluates your logo independently with emotional response data and physiological metrics.
Peer-Reviewed Frameworks
Aaker Brand Personality (1997), Palmer & Schloss ecological valence (2010), and Kobayashi Color Image Scale (1981) — real published research, not marketing jargon.
AI Opinion vs. Measured Data
The fundamental difference is not in the AI model — it's in what the AI has to work with.
"Your colors look professional and convey trust."
WCAG AA contrast 4.58:1. Dominant #1A73E8 (42%). Complementary harmony, score 78/100. Palmer-Schloss preference: +0.34 (ages 25-34, male). Kobayashi: "Clean" + "Modern" image words.
"Your logo is fairly memorable."
Shannon entropy 4.2 bits. Edge density 0.18. Bilateral symmetry 0.87. Cognitive load: Low (processing fluency 82/100). Memory encoding strength: 74/100. Recognition speed: 89/100.
"Evokes trust and professionalism."
Arousal 6.2/10. Valence +0.71. Amygdala: moderate activation. Nucleus accumbens: elevated. Beta wave dominance (13-30 Hz). Aaker: Competence 0.82, Sophistication 0.64.
Not assessed.
Protanopia: 72% effectiveness, 28% color loss. Deuteranopia: 68%. Tritanopia: 91%. 2 problematic color pairs detected. BRISQUE: 23.4 (good). MUSIQ: 71.2.
The Technology Behind $10,000/Month Tools
Enterprise neuromarketing platforms charge $1,000 to $10,000+ per month, require enterprise contracts and dedicated hardware, and are designed for ad testing — not logo analysis.
Same scientific rigor. Fraction of the cost. Purpose-built for logo analysis.
See the Difference for Yourself
Upload your logo and receive 224+ scientific metrics — real computer vision measurements, colorblind simulation, image quality assessment, CLIP classification, brain activation mapping, and more. Your first analysis is free. No credit card required.