Four ways to move product specs: all four lost
Commentary byLiftArchiveOur analysis, not theirsFour tests that changed how technical specs appeared on product pages all lowered add to cart and revenue per visitor.
Mintminds ran these tests for Dutch lighting retailer Lampenlicht.nl, and they were published as a Convert.com case study. None beat the original page.
- All four variants had significantly lower add to cart than the control. These tests lost.
- All four also had lower revenue per visitor.
- No figures for each test, sample sizes or durations were shared.
The change
One of four losing variants: specs auto-expanded and moved above the description.
Simplified mockup drawn by LiftArchive from the shared screenshots.
Control
The original lamp product page showed a technical specs block, with a "Show More" link to see the full list.
Variant
Four separate variants: specs highlighted to match the category filters shoppers had used, specs expanded by default, specs swapped with the description, and a link to the specs placed above the image carousel.
Why it likely lost
Our reading of the result, not the practitioner's claim.
- Analytics showed lots of clicks on the specs, but later user research found technical specs meant little to most buyers. Clicks were not the same as need.
- Giving specs more space pushed images and selling points down, and buyers wanted to see more photos before adding to cart.
- Category filter data pointed to build and style, but research showed people cared more about things photos can't show, like whether a bulb is included.
Caveats: Four tests are grouped in this entry, with no individual numbers. The team followed up with a winning test that added short USPs under carousel images.
Who ran it
Mintminds ran this test for Lampenlicht.nl and published the results (Convert.com case study). The numbers are theirs; the summary and commentary on this page are ours.
Read the original case study on Mintminds →
How to run this test on your store
- Hypothesis
- If we give product specs more prominence on the page, then add to cart will rise because shoppers can find details faster. Check this against user research first, as all four versions here lost.
- Primary metric
- Add-to-cart rate
- Guardrails
- Revenue per visitor
- Image carousel engagement
- Order conversion rate
- Who should test it
- Stores with spec-heavy products that see high clicks on specs. Run user research first: if buyers say specs don't matter, a spec-led change is likely to lose as it did here.
Questions
Should product specs be expanded by default?
Not necessarily. In this case, expanding specs by default lowered add to cart and revenue per visitor.
Why can analytics mislead you about specs?
High clicks on a specs link look like strong interest.
Here, user research showed most buyers didn't care much about technical specs.
What worked instead?
A later test put one key feature or USP under each carousel image. It lifted order conversion by 4.96%.
Similar tests
@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon@oliverkenyon