Landing page split tests for a mortgage platform: +69% conversions
Test run byKlientBoostCRO agency
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsOwning saw high-quality lead volume rise 69% and cost per acquisition fall 52% after a program that included landing page split testing.
KlientBoost ran the work for the mortgage and real estate financing platform and published it as a case study PDF.
The page tests ran alongside offline conversion tracking, ad copy tests and new ad platforms, so the result covers the whole program.
- High-quality lead volume: +69%, as reported by the agency.
- Cost per acquisition: down 52% in the headline figure (the body text says 54%).
- The case study does not say which landing page versions won or by how much.
- No sample size or significance was shared.
Control
The case study says Owning started paid acquisition with KlientBoost from almost nothing in January 2020. Earlier pages are not described.
Variant
KlientBoost split tested landing pages for the paid campaigns. It also set up offline conversion tracking, tested dynamic ad copy and tried several ad platforms.
Why it likely won
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- Offline conversion tracking feeds closed-loan data back to the ad platforms, so bidding favors people who actually close.
- Split testing pages over time tends to stack small wins in form completion.
- Counting only quality leads keeps the program from chasing cheap form fills.
Caveats: Agency-reported before/after of a paid-media program that started from a near-zero baseline in 2020. Page tests, ad tests, tracking and new platforms ran together, and the two CPA figures in the PDF do not match.
Who ran it
KlientBoost ran this test for mortgage and real estate financing platform 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 test our mortgage landing page against a version built around one clear rate or savings promise, then more visitors will submit a quality lead because the value is clear at a glance.
- Primary metric
- Qualified leads per paid visitor
- Guardrails
- Cost per qualified lead
- Lead-to-application rate
- Share of leads that fail credit or eligibility checks
- Who should test it
- Mortgage, lending and other financial lead-gen businesses with a way to track lead quality offline. Without that tracking, a page that raises raw leads may just add weak ones.
Questions
What is offline conversion tracking?
It sends later outcomes, such as a closed loan, back to the ad platform.
Bidding can then target people who become customers, not just form fillers.
Should mortgage landing pages be judged on leads or quality leads?
Quality leads. Cheap form fills that never apply can make a page look better than it is.
Can the 69% lift be credited to the landing pages?
No. Ad copy, tracking and new platforms changed during the same program.
Similar tests
KlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoostKlientBoost