Trying to make the most of our tool, at Visual Website Optimizer, we are always looking for ways to improve the conversion rate of our website. Regular interaction with customers, blog readers and conversion optimization experts gives us additional insights on A/B testing and better understanding of what may or may not work.
From some of the most interesting tests like the fixed chicklet that increased CTR to our careers page by 149% to this case study, we’ve grown a lot with you guys. One specific instance I would like to bring to your attention here is the discussion we had on the blog post, 3 ways to increase conversions using heatmaps.
In that post, we invited readers to share their opinions on two test hypotheses we were mulling for the VWO homepage. The heatmaps/clickmaps revealed that visitors on our website are clicking the top right Free Trial button three times more than our primary call to action button, which is placed in the center of the page.
This had long been a mystery for us until we realized that the login or settings buttons on the top right of the header is almost a norm on the web (think about Gmail, Facebook, they are all the same!). At least that’s what we finally concluded is the reason why clicks on the top right Free Trial button (let’s call it our secondary CTA) is higher than those on our primary CTA. You may want to run a similar test on your landing page – try putting your primary call to action button on the top right and see how it goes.
The secondary CTA button was surrounded by many links. It was an important concern for us that these surrounding links are distracting potential customers and holding back free trial signup rates.
To make sure that links around our secondary CTA are not distracting potential customers, we presented two potential hypotheses that we had in my mind and asked readers for their opinions. Since some constraints didn’t allow us to conduct more than one test at a time, we wanted to know which test should first be tried by us.
In this discussion, a very interesting point was mentioned by one of our blog readers. Gregg (of conversion rate optimization agency, Sq1) suggested that we should emphasize our heatmaps feature in the value proposition to make it more impactful. This is exactly what he said:
“Agencies looking at your tool may have smaller clients who cannot afford Test & Target or WebTrends. So their clients tests may not be 3 day tests, they may be tests that take 30 days to prove out with just one test variations. In all cases, especially these, the LAST thing you want to do is plan tests with flat or losing results.
The reason I chose VWO is because you offered heatmaps.
I would suggest testing a landing page that really plays up the fact that you’re getting a testing tool coupled with heatmaps.
My first test with VWO was flat. But the heat maps actually sparked an idea for a second test by showing me users were clicking on content that did nothing. So we’re making that content active.
Okay, my recommendation below. (I’m not a copywriter, so you’ve been warned) Try changing your Value Proposition to:
“Visualize Your Visitors Clicks and Run Smarter A/B Tests – Simple A/B Testing Coupled with Built-In Actionable Heatmaps”
This is a true “Only” statement. Meaning you guys are the only testing tool within your price range (optimizly and convert) who offer heatmaps.
Your customers tests will perform better because you’re given a window into how visitors will engage with all variations and the control of your landing page.
This could also be coupled with images of heatmaps and examples of how you can apply action after seeing a heatmap.”
This was not the first time that a customer has pointed out that they chose Visual Website Optimizer because of our in-built heatmaps/clickmaps feature. We hear this often from customers since the launch of our heatmaps feature in 2010; still it never occurred to us to use it as the value proposition on our homepage until we read this comment.
Yes, so it was this comment that sparked a test and this case study. Moving forward with this, here is the Control Page we start out with:
We changed our main headline and the subheading to bring visitor’s attention to our USP, i.e combining heatmaps/clickmaps feature with A/B testing in our tool.
Although a small change, words can sometimes change the entire perspective of how things are seen by people. And who can know it better than us? Here is one of our case studies where changing two words increased conversion rate by 28%.
We were especially very excited about this test. It seemed so obvious that we were missing out a great opportunity. Since heatmaps/clickmaps show precisely where visitors of a site are clicking, many times they provide basis for potential hypotheses and also reveal great insights about visitor behavior.
So, considering that the power of A/B testing increases manifold with heatmaps/clickmaps, we were quite confident about the chances of the Variation (given below) to beat the Control. To be honest, we were thinking, what will be the percentage improvement?
Apart from tracking signups, we also analysed visitor behaviour on our site, so we tracked revenue, visits to pricing page, features page, and signup page.
Contrary to our expectations, there was no significant change in our signups and revenue. They almost remained unchanged, however the interesting thing is, the variation page performed well in increasing the overall curiosity about the product.
Visits to our Pricing Page particularly saw a percentage improvement of 9.6% with 98% statistical confidence, which was tested on more than 4000 visitors. Visits to other pages that were tracked also saw some improvement; however statistical confidence weren’t achieved for them when the test was paused.
Maybe people thought that the addition of the new in-built heatmaps/clickmaps feature may have led to increase in prices of Visual Website Optimizer. Or, maybe to some of them, the perceived value of the tool now seemed higher than before.
Either way, visits to the pricing page increased but the sign ups remained the same. This makes us zero in on the pricing page as the next focus of our test series. It is clear that this page in the conversion funnel is where a good majority of our visitors are dropping off. To correct this downturn, we now want to test a few hypotheses to optimize this page for higher conversions.
It’s Time for Your Opinion
The tests we are thinking for our Pricing Page are:
1. I think making call to action buttons text more specific should increase the click through rate from the pricing page. Maybe we can address anxiety-related concerns through CTA text (like, many people might think that sign up is a long process and they will come back to it later when they have more time). To sort this out, let’s say for the free trial plan’s button text on the pricing page, we can use the text “30-day free trial” and below it we can add “Sign up takes 10 seconds”? So people would know that signup is not a long winding form and won’t take much of their time. Similarly, we can try different button text for other plans as well.
2. Heatmaps/clickmaps test for our pricing page revealed “View Larger Plans” as the most clicked button. So, adding the contact number or providing a “request a call” option, instead of the plain “Contact Us” for bigger plans might make us more approachable and improve conversions.
Which one of these two ideas do you prefer? And why? Please share your opinions with us in the comments section. If you have any other hypothesis to suggest, would love to hear that too.