Fisher Investments landing page redesign: unbeaten for 3 years
Test run byKlientBoostCRO agency
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsA landing page KlientBoost designed for Fisher Investments went three years without being beaten by the firm's own challenger pages.
KlientBoost built it using redesign split tests, multi-step (breadcrumb) forms and device-specific tests, and published the result as a PDF case study.
No conversion figures were shared, so the size of the lift is unknown.
- Longevity: the page held up against Fisher's in-house challengers for three years.
- Lead conversions: no rate, volume or lift was published.
- No sample sizes or significance were shared for the redesign tests.
The change
A tested redesign with a multi-step form replaces the original page.
Simplified mockup drawn by LiftArchive from the shared screenshots.
Control
Fisher Investments' earlier direct-response landing pages, which the firm says weren't performing as needed. Their design is not described.
Variant
KlientBoost tested several full redesigns against each other and kept the winner. The page used a multi-step form and was tuned separately for different devices, using customer feedback.
Why it likely won
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- Testing whole redesigns, not single tweaks, can find a much stronger layout early.
- A multi-step form suits high-value financial leads, where many details are needed but asking all at once deters people.
- Separate tests for mobile and desktop likely fixed problems that a single design would hide.
Caveats: KlientBoost reported this without any conversion numbers. Paid campaigns changed at the same time, and the three-year claim comes from the agency.
Who ran it
KlientBoost ran this test for investment management firm and published the results (KlientBoost case study (PDF)). The numbers are theirs; the summary and commentary on this page are ours.
Read the original case study on KlientBoost →
How to run this test on your site
- Hypothesis
- If we split our long lead form into short steps that start with an easy question about the visitor's goals, then more qualified investors will finish it because each step feels small.
- Primary metric
- Completed lead forms per visitor
- Guardrails
- Share of leads meeting asset minimums
- Step-one drop-off
- Mobile vs desktop completion rate
- Who should test it
- Wealth managers and financial firms that need several qualifying details from each lead. A short single-step form may be better if you only need a name and email.
Questions
What is multi-redesign split testing?
Several completely different page designs run against each other at once.
The best one becomes the new baseline for smaller tests.
Why test separately by device?
Mobile and desktop visitors behave differently. A layout that wins on desktop can lose on a phone.
How much did conversions improve?
Not shared. The only claim is that the page went unbeaten for three years.
Similar tests
KlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoost