ExpressWatches Anxiety Reduction Seal Test Results

VERSION A
How site visitors voted:
VERSION A (42%)
VERSION B (58%)
Actual Test Results:(Click back to see Versions A & B)
Version A, the brand authentication element, increased sales over the low price guarantee by 107% at a 95% confidence rate.

This was a clean A/B test; no other aspects on the page were changed. ExpressWatches, a UK based online retailer of Seiko watches, conducted this test with the help of HP Group using Visual Website Optimizer.

This is a great test that we hope inspires you to test the various guarantees and ‘anxiety reduction’ elements on your site. On top of substantially lifting conversions, this test gave insights into what shoppers believed to be most important.

If you’re optimizing sales for an ecommerce site where the product brands are more famous than the site brand, perhaps you should be touting the product brands more than your own.

Click Here to see which security seal increased conversions

> Tweet that you ‘Got it Right’ here.
> Tweet that you ‘Got it Wrong’ here.

36 Comments:

  1. Nick Fortunatus

    Got this one right. The brand authentication just seemed to make more sense to me, especially in an industry like watches (or jewelry or fashion) where knockoffs are so easily passed off as originals.

  2. Erm…didn’t see an option to vote in Chrome. Hm me maybe? Seemed pretty clearly option A though. The graphic on option B was horrid, which to me is an example that you’ve got to make sure that your test cleanly evaluates the correct element. I’d like to see a price guarantee graphic that looks similar to the brand one.

  3. Gabrielle Provost

    I guessed B… so I looked at the price of the watch and A makes sense because if a customer pay over £300, he’s probably more interested in the authentication element. However, if the watch was worth under $100, then maybe the price element would have have a higher lift.

  4. Got it right! It would be interesting to conduct this test in other industries and verticals. Like Nick said — the authenticity assurance is needed with watches, but I wonder what would perform better if you were, say, selling chocolate or health insurance.

  5. Got this wrong – but like Nick says above, I can see how brand authentication is a major influence in a market like watches. Maybe the price guarentee works against them to some extent because of all the shady sites that make all sorts of promises.

  6. got this one right too. people who seeks brands would prefer to make sure an authentic one rather then getting the best price.

  7. Got it wrong… but agreed with your statement, for I too felt it was a toss up. But as usual… reading from the rest of you guys, I learn a lot! I still think both are a bit “busy” and that price guarantee was pretty bad…

  8. I got it right, I think this one was obvious. The question is, which worries a person more. A fake watch or paying slightly more. I think on this value a fake watch is the biggest worry by far.

  9. Of course brand authentication will have better conversions however I would suggest testing
    more readable brand authentication image
    reversing the lighter text on dark background…

  10. I would like to see this test performed on a product that wasn’t out of stock. That element alone breaks the control and could have skewed the numbers regardless of which version was served. Some shoppers don’t mind waiting while other shoppers do. They already made up their mind if they will purchase the watch or not based on that alone.

  11. I was surprised with the results. I voted for B. Gabrielle Provost proved a good point. I wish both examples were the same size. It would make it easier to make a side by side comparison. Example A: 942px × 571px. Example B: 607px × 383px.

  12. I chose “a” because for the average bloke, Seiko’s typical market, £315 is a fairly hefty sum for a watch. So I figured that the authentication factor would give them a better feeling than the lowest price guarantee.

  13. I guessed this one right. But I think it was because the price gaurantee was a lame text format. Too much text diluted the results.

    I think they should test a colorful “lowest price gauranteed” in red or something, with a standout.

    I’m sure that that would do better. That “Click for details” is a bad call to action. Clarify it on the page, don’t make people click out and back.

  14. A classic case of quality vs price. However, without knowing the context in which visitors are led to this page, it is difficult at best to make an educated decision. Do they attract high-end customers or people who want the most bang for the buck. It would appear their marketing must have focused on those who care mainly about quality.

  15. Nick nails it, watches online is dicey and an authorized dealer calms the fear some.

  16. I got this one right…

    Simply came down to presentation for me. As others mentioned, the price guarantee creative seemed poorly exectuted. “Never beaten on price” is a clumsy phrase, and the overall treatment was dull and boring.

    Considering the product, I still think the authorized dealer would come out on top, but I think it would definitely be much closer if the guarantee was given a better, more professional looking treatment (is there really a “guarantee” associated with it?).

  17. I agree with what a lot of folks said here – voted A for authentication when the price point is what it is – expensive. ;) At that price point – people probably want to know they’re getting the real thing. But then again, a hypothesis is just a hypothesis until you see the results.

  18. Got it right. I’m an ex online watch retailer of this brand.

    The brand recognition has more to do with feeling comfortable that the product will be supported through proper channels.
    There are actually VERY FEW knockoff Seikos around – but there are VERY MANY non-genuine sellers in an undercurrent of gray market sales globally. Genuine product sold through unreliable channels. The Seiko Authorised Dealer status can be verified, whereas the status of the product you get may not be.

  19. By the way, GBP315 is a reasonable price for a non gray-market item. This model probably sells in store for around GBP400

  20. Very interesting test. However, I believe it’s dangerous to mix the concepts of confidence and uplift.
    “Version A, the brand authentication element, increased sales over the low price guarantee by 107% at a 95% confidence rate.”
    But the 95% confidence rate relates to the directional result, and 107% is the observed, mid-point lift? And if the confidence level was only 95% on a 107% observed lift, the data volumes here must have been tiny, the results very noisy, and the confidence interval enormous. I wonder where the lift would come out to if this test was run long as 107% feels very high.

  21. It’s hard to take a results of a website seriously when the two image samples are different sizes for us to try and compare! If they can’t get that right…what else are they fudging? This is a most basic task and doesn’t inspire any confidence in the survey, results or this website. Please fix to eliminate this distractor.

  22. Got it right but agree with Tom that the difference in the design of the two tested elements could well have been a factor and not necessarily the ‘offer’! The authorised dealer image engendered more ‘confidence’ but given the product and the price that might not be too unsurprising!

  23. Agree Brand credibility works any time. Got it right :)

    But the out of stock – 3 day shipping message not convincing, gives a cheap deal feel.

  24. I couldn’t decide either way, which is always a great reason to do a test and find out.

    Also, I didn’t thing the overall site design was particularly good. Ugly and mismatched colours, reverse type and CTA below the fold to name a few.

    A decent CRO specialist could probably lift their conversion rate even higher than what they achieved in this test.

  25. A great example of a key learning that tells you more about your visitors. In this case that there is anxiety around the authenticity of the watch.

  26. It’s a watch so reassurance of authenticity is more important than a cheaper price. For other items this could go the other way.

  27. Another very interesting test!
    One question on top of all good comments above: Could it be that the price banner is a distraction element? While the brand banner is only reassuring on the way to the shopping basket, the price banner actually asks you to click away from the site (probably just a pop-up, but still…)

  28. We are hardly mixing the concept of uplift and confidence. The confidence level is a percentage that gives insight into the accuracy of the uplift. In this case the tester is 95% positive that the uplift of 107% is because of the variation in the element and not due to chance. The inverse then would say that there is a 5% chance that the 107% lift in sales is due to chance.

  29. It’s a nice clean test with a clear result.

    Now they need to test a combination of brand authenticity AND their low price guarantee. I bet that would give them another boost in conversions.

  30. I got A right. I thought to myself that if you are able to pay that amount of money for a nice-to-have product, then you care less about the price. Therefore I do not see this test as 100% valid because for sure the result would have been different with another and cheaper and less branded product.

  31. Got this one wrong. Thought having the Seiko logo in the top left on the page would suffice. Shows how important it is (to test!) and to have credibility/authenticity in the area immediately around the buying area.

    Surprised it was such a lift though…

  32. Got this right :) – when I thought hmm, if I were to buy a watch I would probably like to know if it is a fake … so the brand verification thing really reassured me. Thinking like a customer has started to help me get a lot more right in these quizzes.

    The price thing was negligible for me, because a searcher is anyway going to compare the watches across many different websites.

  33. Deliberated with myself on this one and eventually went for B and got it wrong!! What edged it for me was the difference in visibility of the graphics … I felt whilst B wasn’t great, it did stand out more than A. My feeling is that tests such as these should have the exact same creative to make them totally clean. Otherwise, isn’t there a risk that more than one thing is being tested at a time?

  34. I chose ‘A’ solely because the price box encouraged buyers to click away from the screen, which seems like the last thing you’d want to encourage them to do at the time of purchase (even if it’s a pop up, it’s distracting).

  35. Got it right, the tell tales sign was the trust factor with the visible brand authentication

  36. When I first saw this title ExpressWatches Anxiety Reduction Seal Test Results : Which Test Won on google I just whent and bookmark it. I all the time emailed this webpage post page to all my contacts, because if like to read it next my links will too.

Join the conversation:

Please note:
1. Comment moderation is enabled, I'll do my best to approve comments asap.
2. If you have any trouble submitting comments, please send me an email (anneh at whichtestwon dot com).



Sign up for new test results & how-tos:


Privacy Protected