Mida's agent reads your own results and tells you what is worth testing next.

Try it for FREE now

Do styling A/B tests work on category pages?

About the same as anywhere else. Styling tests win 16% of the time on category pages, against 15% 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 21% on category pages on 33 tests tests.

The numbers

category pagesall page types
Tests analysed100+1,000+
Beat control16%15%
No measurable difference63%
Lost to control21%
Median lift when it won +15.2%

Median traffic per variant was 3540 visitors.

What else is worth testing on category pages

change typewin rate on category pagestests
Layout 21%33 tests
Styling (this page) 16%100+

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

What counts as a styling test

Visual treatment shifts — spacing, weight, borders, colour, shadows — with the same content in the same order. Move the content and it is a layout test. Rewrite it and it is a copy test.

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

Styling tests that won on category pages

  • Repositions and resizes a fixed floating element on the page without changing any text
  • Changes the CTA text color to blue (#3155A4) without altering wording
  • Changes primary button background/border color to green, no text change
  • Shows a collection-specific manifesto banner section on category pages by toggling its display to visible

Styling tests that did not

  • changes the CTA text color to blue, no text change
  • Applies the same background image to the bonus box of each slots-alt item without changing any text
  • Forces an existing hidden button to be displayed

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.

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.