Skip to main content
winner

Product: CTA Button Optimization

Hypothesis

If we test a similar change on our product pages as Reverb tested, then our conversion metric will likely improve based on their implementation decision.

LayoutProduct PageE-commerceindustry_leakreverbwinner

Test Results

Key Learning

Problem: The primary call-to-action on the product isn't converting at its potential — design, copy, or placement may be the bottleneck.

What worked: Reverb implemented this UI change (Dec 22, 2023). Implementation suggests positive internal results

Takeaway: Even small lifts compound — across thousands of sessions, this adds up. Use this win as a foundation for further iteration on adjacent elements.

How to Apply This to Your Site

This experiment demonstrated that product: cta button optimization can improve conversions. The test was run on a product page page in the e-commerce industry.

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

Reverb.com ran this site wide stylistic redesign experiment. It involved a number of rather "soft" UI changes involving button, font, and component styles. Fastforward two months and it now seems like it has been rolled out - suggesting that the variation did not hurt to say the least.

Methodology

Confidence Level
70%

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

loser

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.

winner

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.

inconclusive

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.

winner+5.3%

Checkout: Multiple Steps

Problem: Friction during the checkout process causes users to abandon right when they're closest to converting.

Explore More Experiments