Do headline A/B tests work on landing pages?

About the same as anywhere else. Headline tests win 6% of the time on landing pages, against 10% across all page types. This page neither helps nor hurts the change type.

It is not the best use of a test slot on this page though. Layout tests win 14% on landing pages on 42 tests tests.

The numbers

	landing pages	all page types
Tests analysed	100+	500+
Beat control	6%	10%
No measurable difference	84%	—
Lost to control	9%	—
Median lift when it won	+19.5%	—

Median traffic per variant was 1060 visitors.

What else is worth testing on landing pages

change type	win rate on landing pages	tests
Layout	14%	42 tests
Styling	11%	50+
CTA copy	10%	31 tests
Split URL	8%	250+
Headline (this page)	6%	100+

Only change types with at least 30 tests on landing pages appear here.

What counts as a headline test

The main heading is rewritten. Structure, styling and every other element stay put.

Control and variant wireframe for a headline A/B test — Control on the left, variant on the right. For how this differs from adjacent categories, see the headline benchmark.

Headline tests that won on landing pages

Replaced a duration/project-count headline and screenshot-grid visual with a clickable-prototype-in-30-days headline plus a video play button and different body copy/CTA text
question-based headline about how successful people maintain masculinity and manhood after 40, paired with a subhead citing a 92% statistic about 5 crucial pre-6AM habits
listicle-style headline promising 5 success hacks, paired with subhead citing a 92% statistic about early morning habits
Reworked hero headline and body from a specific workflow/product naming to a more generic template/product-page framing, changed the copy action label, and renamed the purchase label to lifetime access

Headline tests that did not

headline stating value proposition of growing business through customer reviews and insights
Changed a tax-free vehicle reimbursement headline to mileage reimbursements, reworded body copy, removed the hero phone image and CTA button, and added award badges next to the rating
step 1 instruction: request an appointment

These are individual tests, not rules. Each ran on one site, with one audience, against one page we are not showing you. They are picked to be illustrative rather than sampled at random, and a change that won here can lose on your page for reasons none of this captures. Read them as prompts for what to test, not as findings to copy.

Who ran these tests

This is every Mida account that ran a readable test — in-house marketers, founders, product teams, and agencies working on client sites. Nothing here is filtered by who ran the experiment or how experienced they are.

Low win rates are normal in experimentation, including at the top end. Microsoft's experimentation team, reporting on its own platform, found that only about one third of ideas improve the metric they were designed to improve — and that roughly another third actively hurt it. That is a dedicated experimentation organisation with research, prioritisation and review behind every test.

A mixed population like this one runs below that. The gap is roughly what disciplined practice buys you: ideas grounded in research rather than opinion, one variable at a time, and tests built so the result can actually be read.

So treat these as a general base rate, not a target. If you would rather not close that gap the slow way, find a CRO agency in the United States, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands or Australia — or browse every region.

A win is a variant that beat its control on that test's primary goal with a statistically significant result. Tests that never got enough traffic to say anything either way are excluded. The methodology has the full detail, including what these numbers cannot tell you.