Full redesign of luxury skincare kit page: lost by a large margin
Test run byConversion FanaticsCRO agency
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsA full redesign of a luxury skincare kit page lost to the original by a large margin.
Conversion Fanatics ran this test for a dermatologist-created skincare brand.
Many changes shipped together, and the exact size of the loss was not shared.
- Conversions: down by a large margin, according to the agency. This test lost.
- No percentage, sample size or duration was shared.
- A later iteration that changed the headline, swapped the dropdown for radio buttons and changed the button text won.
The change
Three separate kits become one product with a dropdown, plus proof, video and price.
Simplified mockup drawn by LiftArchive from the shared screenshots.
Control
The page explained the steps of the system, then listed three skin-type kits, each with its own buy button. It showed no social proof and no price.
Variant
The redesign added better images, a benefit headline, two social proof areas and a how-it-works video. It showed one large product image with a skin-type dropdown, a visible price, and a popup explaining the differences.
Why it likely lost
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- A dropdown hides the three options, which may have made choosing harder than seeing all three kits.
- A general benefit headline may have been less clear than naming the product.
- Showing a high price up front, with many other changes at once, could have shifted who clicked through.
- Because so much changed, the cause of the loss can't be pinned down.
Caveats: This was a full redesign with many changes at once, so no single element explains the loss. The size of the drop, sample and duration were not shared.
Who ran it
Conversion Fanatics ran this test for a luxury dermatologist-created skincare brand and published the results (Conversion Fanatics blog case study). The numbers are theirs; the summary and commentary on this page are ours.
Read the original case study on Conversion Fanatics →
How to run this test on your store
- Hypothesis
- If we redesign the kit page with proof, video, a visible price and a single product with a skin-type selector, then more shoppers will buy because the value and the choice are clearer.
- Primary metric
- Conversion rate
- Guardrails
- Revenue per visitor
- Option selection rate
- Checkout abandonment
- Who should test it
- High-priced brands whose product pages lack proof or price. Plan to iterate: if a redesign loses, study where shoppers got stuck before giving up.
Questions
Do full page redesigns usually win A/B tests?
Not reliably. Big redesigns change many things at once, and this one lost by a large margin before an iteration fixed it.
Is a dropdown a good way to pick product versions?
It hides the choices. In the follow-up to this test, radio buttons replaced the dropdown and the page won.
What should I do when a redesign loses?
Check heatmaps and data for where shoppers got stuck, fix those spots, and test again.
That is how this agency turned the loss into a win.
Similar tests
@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon