Health example in premium kit copy: +10% revenue per session
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsAdding a real-life health scenario to the premium kit's product copy lifted revenue per session by 10%, with the least severe example winning.
Embark ran this test on its own dog DNA kit product page, and it was published as a VWO case study.
The winning version also raised conversion rate by 7% and average order value by $9.
- Conversion rate: +7% for the less-severe example, so more visitors bought a kit.
- Average order value: +$9, which suggests more buyers chose the premium kit over the baseline kit.
- Revenue per session: +10%. Embark treats this as a primary KPI because it combines conversion rate and order value.
- Only the winning variation's numbers were shared. Results for the more severe and middle examples were not given.
The change
The variant's product copy adds a less severe, real-life health example.
Simplified mockup drawn by LiftArchive from the shared screenshots.
Control
The premium kit product copy described the extra genetic health information without a concrete example of when an owner might need it.
Variant
The copy added a real scenario where knowing the dog's health details would matter. Three versions ran, from a more severe example to a less severe one, and the less severe example won.
Why it likely won
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- An example makes an abstract benefit concrete. Owners can picture when the extra health data would be useful.
- A milder scenario may feel relevant to more owners. A severe one can feel unlikely or upsetting, which may push people away.
- The premium kit's main difference is health information, so making that benefit vivid speaks straight to the upgrade decision.
- This built on an earlier Embark test where more clinical copy beat emotional copy, so the team already knew which tone fit its buyers.
Caveats: This was a test with three variations, and only the winner's numbers were shared; no sample size, duration or significance level was given. It was a follow-up to an earlier test on clinical versus emotional copy.
Who ran it
Embark ran this test for Embark and published the results (VWO case study). The numbers are theirs; the summary and commentary on this page are ours.
Read the original case study on Embark →
How to run this test on your store
- Hypothesis
- If we add a realistic, everyday example of when the premium version's extra feature matters, then more visitors will choose the premium option because they can picture the benefit in their own life.
- Primary metric
- Revenue per session
- Guardrails
- Conversion rate
- Share of orders on the premium version
- Refund or return rate
- Who should test it
- Stores that sell a basic and a premium version where the premium benefit is hard to picture, such as health, insurance-like or diagnostic products. It is less likely to matter when the upgrade is obvious, like a bigger size.
Questions
Should product copy use dramatic or mild examples?
In Embark's test, the least severe example beat the more severe ones.
A mild case can feel more likely to happen, so more buyers see themselves in it.
Test both, because the right level depends on your audience.
What metric should I use for a copy test aimed at upsells?
Revenue per session is a good primary metric because it captures both conversion rate and order value.
A copy change can raise one while lowering the other, as Embark's earlier clinical-copy test showed.
Does adding examples to product descriptions help sales?
It can when the benefit is abstract. A concrete scenario helps shoppers understand why a feature matters, which is often what stops them from upgrading.
Similar tests
@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon
@DaveDiederen