# Guarantee Bullets vs Paragraph Copy A/B Test Example

Page: https://alidemirbas.com.tr/en/lab/ab-test-library/tests/guarantee-bullets-vs-paragraph-copy-ab-test-example

## Hypothesis

If the assurances appear as short bullets instead of a paragraph, visitors may scan topics such as cancellation terms, data security, support and delivery at a glance. With the same claims and terms kept, easier scanning may show up in the primary action completion rate, though bullets may also surface concerns visitors had not considered.

## When to run this test

If visitors keep contacting support about topics the page already answers, heatmaps show the paragraph being skipped, or session recordings catch them moving past the section quickly, the assurances are probably buried too deep in the paragraph. With bullets, they should find the assurances more easily, ask fewer questions on those topics and reach the primary action with less hesitation. Do not set the list up as a stand-in for the legal text, and if the problem lies in the assurances themselves or in missing terms, review the content first, because a format change will not fix it.

## Primary metric

**Primary action completion rate**: Compare completion to see whether a bulleted reassurance list changes the target action.

## Other metrics

- **Related support contacts**: Check whether questions about the listed topics decrease.
- **Section visibility**: Measure whether the section is seen.
- **Time on page**: Read time alongside completion without assuming extra reading is helpful.
- **Return or cancellation rate**: Track later issues caused by misunderstood assurances.

## What to check before and during the test

- **Format**: Turn the existing reassurance paragraph into a short bulleted list.
- **Keep constant**: Keep claims, conditions, order, placement and other content unchanged.
- **Understanding**: Assess relevant questions or research separately from conversion.
- **Audience**: Review new and returning visitors.
- **Separate tests**: New reassurance claims, a different bullet count or adding icons are separate tests.

## What to watch when reading the result

- Hold any gain in completed primary actions against the return or cancellation rate. If the list brings more actions but more returns or cancellations later, assume an assurance was misunderstood and do not treat the gain as a reason to ship, and do not treat a rise in time on page as helpful reading by itself.
- Keep this result scoped to this page and this set of assurances. Review new and returning visitors separately, and check that the list does not come before information needed for a decision, such as price or coverage, and that section visibility stays similar in both versions.
- Do not close an unclear test on the first weeks of data; returns and cancellations show up later, so keep tracking them through the follow-up window. Enter the current primary action completion rate and the lift you want to detect into the [sample size calculator](https://alidemirbas.com.tr/en/calculators/sample-size-calculator), then divide the sample per variant by daily traffic per arm to see how many days the test needs.

## Frequently Asked Questions

### What risk comes from turning conditional assurances into bullets?

Shortening can omit conditions and make a qualified promise appear unconditional. Preserve those conditions and monitor cancellations or returns linked to misunderstanding.

### How can improved understanding be investigated?

Use completed main actions as the primary outcome. Relevant support questions and direct research inform understanding; time on page does not establish it.

### Can icons be added to the bullets in this comparison?

Not without changing the treatment. Icons introduce another visual difference. Keep essential price and scope information accessible and compare icon treatments separately.