Multiple: Funnel Conversion Rate Optimization for Power Equipment Retailer
Hypothesis
A paid-traffic-dependent power equipment retailer with below-average conversion rates has conversion problems at both discovery (high funnel) and consideration (low funnel) stages. Teaching the marketing team CRO fundamentals alongside making site improvements will deliver sustained conversion gains.
Test Results
Key Learning
Context: Users can't quickly find relevant products or content on the multiple, leading to frustration and early exits.
What was tested: Power equipment buyers do significant research before purchasing — high-funnel content optimization (category pages, buying guides) has outsized impact. Training internal teams on CRO fundamentals during an engagement creates lasting capability rather than dependency. Below-average conversion rates on paid traffic indicate the site is not delivering on ad promises — landing page/product page alignment is key. D2C brands cutting out middlemen need to prove value online clearly; feature and spec communication is critical for considered purchases
Result: No statistically significant difference was detected. This null result is still valuable — it narrows the search space and helps calibrate your minimum detectable effect for future tests.
How to Apply This to Your Site
This experiment tested multiple: funnel conversion rate optimization for power equipment retailer but produced no statistically significant change. The test was run on a landing page page in the e-commerce industry. Inconclusive results suggest this particular change may not be a priority — focus testing effort on higher-impact areas.
Before you test: Consider that layout tests typically require adequate traffic to reach statistical significance. Run your test for at least 2 full business cycles to account for weekly traffic patterns.
What Was Tested
Generator Depot had been driving paid traffic with poor ROI due to low conversion rates. Invesp worked both on site optimization and training the internal marketing team to understand conversion data and make better decisions. Three months in, Generator Depot's team was grasping CRO fundamentals. Results showed 25% improvement at the low end of the funnel (product/checkout) and 60% at the high end (category/search).
Methodology
Build On These Learnings
Save your own experiments, spot winning patterns across your test history, and stop repeating what's already been tried.
Related Experiments
Does Restructuring Plan Detail Cards Improve Click-Through?
Test the variable users actually complain about — not the variable that's easiest to redesign. This test is a textbook case of treating form when the problem is content. Cross-brand qualitative research had consistently flagged three specific confusion themes: (1) pricing structure is opaque — users can't predict what they'll pay; (2) plan names are brand-driven rather than benefit-driven, so the names themselves don't communicate what the user is buying; (3) no side-by-side comparison — vertical layouts force users to scroll and remember instead of compare in parallel. Visual hierarchy is a presentation improvement; it does nothing about pricing opacity, naming clarity, or comparison difficulty. The test reached its planned sample size and produced a directionally-negative result at the noise floor — because organizing unclear content doesn't make the content clearer. The transferable insight isn't about visual hierarchy specifically; it's about the importance of mapping qualitative complaints to the test variable. If the user research says 'I don't understand what this plan costs,' the test should manipulate cost-clarity. If it says 'I can't tell these plans apart,' the test should manipulate differentiation. Layout tests are appropriate when the complaint is about layout — not when they're a default reflex.
Restructuring Homepage Hierarchy to Surface Personalized Offers
The story behind this win is the iteration discipline. The first attempt at this homepage redesign changed two systems at once (messaging + routing) and produced an ambiguous result: the entry metric moved slightly positive while downstream metrics moved meaningfully negative. The team correctly identified that the routing change — which inadvertently replaced direct links to a personalized plan-search experience with modal-driven entry into a generic flow — was the downstream killer. The iteration restored the original routing and kept ONLY the homepage hierarchy changes. All funnel metrics moved directionally positive in lockstep (entry +2.38%, mid-funnel +7%, conversion +11.81%) — none stat-sig individually but consistent enough across the funnel to justify shipping. Element-level diagnostics confirmed the mechanism: the segment CTAs the team intended to promote saw a 26-30% lift in unique-visitor interaction, while the unchanged hero banner stayed flat (as expected). Two key behavioral observations: (1) page-length reduction surfaced a 4x lift on a previously buried bottom-of-page zip code input — proving the secondary lesson that 'less page' can mean 'more conversion real estate'; (2) desktop strongly outperformed mobile, with the suspected cause being mobile's lead-with-form pattern (zip code above hero) — putting the form before the message creates friction. The broader transferable insight: when a messy test confounds multiple variables, the right move is to isolate one variable in the next test, not to abandon the hypothesis.
Content Page: Maybe Later on Content Page
Context: Key actions on the content page disappear as users scroll, creating a gap between intent and the ability to act.
Checkout: Multiple Steps
Problem: Friction during the checkout process causes users to abandon right when they're closest to converting.