Do price framing A/B tests work on homepages?

About the same as anywhere else. Price framing tests win 16% of the time on homepages, against 13% 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 27% on homepages on 100+ tests.

Small sample. Few of these tests cleared the bar. The 95% interval on that win rate runs 9% to 29%, so read the figure as directional.

The numbers

	homepages	all page types
Tests analysed	49 tests	100+
Beat control	16%	13%
No measurable difference	73%	—
Lost to control	10%	—
Median lift when it won	not reported	—

Median traffic per variant was 469 visitors.

What else is worth testing on homepages

change type	win rate on homepages	tests
Layout	27%	100+
Hero image	18%	50+
Price framing (this page)	16%	49 tests
Social proof	15%	50+
Styling	15%	500+
Body copy	14%	100+
Split URL	14%	100+
CTA copy	11%	100+
Headline	10%	250+

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

What counts as a price framing test

The number stays the same; the presentation changes. Per-day instead of per-month, annual instead of monthly, fee broken out instead of rolled in, anchor shown or hidden.

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

Price framing tests that won on homepages

Upsell modal offering a credit toward Premium, with CTA to unlock Premium, a decline option warning of losing the savings, and a disclosure stating a charge today with annual renewal.
Changes displayed price to one amount and crossed-out price to a lower amount, plus sets hidden form field values
Hides the default price, and adds price displays to one-time and subscription purchase labels, showing a 10% discounted price with struck-through original price for the subscription option
Hides the base price, adds original price plus a 10%-discounted subscription price with strikethrough next to purchase option labels, and relocates the pack-size selector into the add-to-cart aside.

Price framing tests that did not

Family-plan upsell block: headline offering to file/protect whole family, opt-out link, feature summary for multiple members from one dashboard, a charge/renewal disclosure, an add-unlimited-filings sub-heading, and a savings claim citing no per-filing fees and savings vs separate filings
list of price points mixing monthly fees, flat prices, and a percentage bonus offer
Sets hidden form values and changes displayed price to one amount with a crossed-out lower price shown as the old price

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.