# Landing page split tests for a mortgage platform: +69% conversions

- Outcome: Won
- Page type: Landing page (Lead-gen)
- Elements: Landing page design
- Test run by: [KlientBoost](https://liftarchive.com/practitioners/klientboost/)
- Commentary by: LiftArchive (our analysis, not theirs)
- Original source: https://wp.klientboost.com/case-studies/Owning%20-%20Case%20Study.pdf
- Page: https://liftarchive.com/test/klientboost-owning-ppc-landing-pages/

Owning 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.

## Result

**+69% conversions**

- 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)

- 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.

## How to run this test

- 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
- Guardrail: Cost per qualified lead
- Guardrail: Lead-to-application rate
- Guardrail: 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.

---

Credit: KlientBoost ran this test and owns the result. Summary and commentary by LiftArchive (https://liftarchive.com/test/klientboost-owning-ppc-landing-pages/).
Usage: Free to use, quote and build on, with credit and a link: name the practitioner or organization that ran the test and link to its LiftArchive page. The results belong to the practitioners who ran and shared them; the summaries and commentary are LiftArchive's.