Value Proposition Landing Page

The Choices Wealth Transfer landing page had a bounce problem. People were arriving and leaving before doing anything. The design assumed they already knew what the product was, the copy was feature-led instead of benefit-led, and the CTAs were getting lost. I redesigned it with research, A/B testing, and a modular system that could serve multiple campaign variants without rebuilding from scratch each time.

Analytics showed the drop. User research explained it. The page assumed visitors already knew what Choices Wealth Transfer was. Most didn't, and there was nothing on the page to fix that.

What the Data Showed

• High bounce rate. People weren't engaging past the hero, and the CTA wasn't prompting any decisions.
• User interviews found that visitors couldn't map the offer to their own situation. The page assumed familiarity they didn't have.
• A/B testing showed benefit-driven headlines significantly outperformed feature-led copy on every engagement metric.

The research made the strategic direction clear: the page didn't need a visual refresh, it needed a restructured information hierarchy and a modular architecture that could serve different traffic sources without rebuilding for each campaign.

Key UX Decisions

• One primary CTA per page. No competing actions above the fold.
• Progressive detail: concise headline and outcome statement first, expandable sections for high-intent visitors.
• Pain-point-first framing. Lead with the user's problem, not the product's feature list.

A/B testing was conducted comparing three new design variations against the original landing page. A second round validated improvements by comparing the final redesign directly against the original.

Before

• Outdated, generic layout with no personalisation or clear next steps.
• Users lacked clear guidance on what Choices Wealth Transfer offered.
• No step-by-step process visible, visitors couldn't understand what to do or why.

After

• Personalised welcome message (e.g., "Welcome, [User Name]") creates immediate relevance.
• Clear step-by-step process so users immediately understand the next action required.
• FAQ-style collapsible sections prevent information overload and improve readability.
• Optimised CTA buttons, high-contrast and action-oriented, one per page.

Post-launch metrics were monitored over 60 days, demonstrating consistent improvements across all tracked indicators.

• The single-CTA change and pain-point-first headline delivered the largest lifts. Both were structural decisions, not visual ones.
• Each A/B round removed internal debate and produced directional evidence. Without it, leading with the user's problem instead of the product's features would have been hard to hold in stakeholder reviews.

Conversion optimisation is an information architecture problem. The visual redesign mattered less than what information appeared first and why. Leading with the user's problem cost nothing in design complexity but required conviction to defend. The modular system paid compounding returns on every campaign variant that came after it.