Mobile-specific optimization experiments. Learn which mobile patterns improve conversion on small screens.
Across 8 mobile ux experiments, 13% resulted in a statistically significant win. Winning variants saw an average lift of +4.4%. Meanwhile, 1 test underperformed the control with an average drop of -5.4%.
6 experiments were inconclusive, meaning the difference between control and variant was not statistically significant. Inconclusive results are still valuable — they tell you what doesn't move the needle, so you can focus testing effort elsewhere.
These results come from real A/B tests with sample sizes ranging from hundreds to millions of visitors. Use them to inform your own mobile ux testing strategy and avoid repeating experiments that have already been run.
Context: Users can't quickly find relevant products or content on the landing page, leading to frustration and early exits.
Context: Mobile users experience the homepage differently — smaller screens, touch targets, and limited attention require purpose-built design.
Context: Users arriving at the multiple can't efficiently find what they're looking for, increasing bounce rates.
Context: Mobile users experience the multiple differently — smaller screens, touch targets, and limited attention require purpose-built design.
Context: Mobile users experience the multiple differently — smaller screens, touch targets, and limited attention require purpose-built design.
Problem: The first screen of the landing page must immediately communicate value — if it doesn't, users bounce before scrolling.
Context: Mobile users experience the mobile differently — smaller screens, touch targets, and limited attention require purpose-built design.
Problem: The information hierarchy on the landing page may not match how users actually scan and process the content.
Save your own experiments, get AI-powered test ideas, and build on patterns from 8+ real tests.
View Plans & Pricing