Real experiments. Real outcomes. Actionable patterns. Browse A/B tests with problem-to-solution framing, results, and recommendations for what to test next.
Context: Multi-step processes on the home landing can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Problem: How "Maybe later" is implemented on the content page can meaningfully affect conversion — this element is worth testing.
Context: The registration experience on the product asks too much too soon, causing potential users to drop off.
Context: Multi-step processes on the listing can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Context: Multi-step processes on the product can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Context: Multi-step processes on the home landing can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Context: The information hierarchy on the listing may not match how users actually scan and process the content.
Context: Visual emphasis on the general may not be drawing attention to the right elements — size, color, and contrast guide the eye.
Context: Friction during the product process causes users to abandon right when they're closest to converting.
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.
Context: Key actions on the content page disappear as users scroll, creating a gap between intent and the ability to act.
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.
Context: Multi-step processes on the listing can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Context: The registration experience on the product asks too much too soon, causing potential users to drop off.
Context: How prices are displayed on the product directly influences perceived value and willingness to buy.
Context: Multi-step processes on the home landing can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Context: Capturing visitor attention on the product with modals or overlays is a balance between engagement and annoyance.
Context: Multi-step processes on the product can overwhelm users if they can't see how far along they are or how much is left.
Problem: Friction during the checkout process causes users to abandon right when they're closest to converting.
Context: Friction during the checkout process causes users to abandon right when they're closest to converting.
Build on what's already been learned. Save your own experiments, surface winning patterns, and make every test count.