Do body copy A/B tests work in Professional Services?

In line with both baselines. Body copy tests win 11% in Professional Services, against 11% for body copy tests generally and 14% for Professional Services generally. Neither the category nor the vertical is moving this much.

The strongest change type we can measure in Professional Services is Layout at 25% on 32 tests tests.

Small winner set. Few of these tests cleared the bar. The 95% interval on that win rate runs 4% to 25%, so read the figure as directional.

The numbers

	Professional Services	all industries
Tests analysed	36 tests	250+
Beat control	11%	11%
No measurable difference	69%	—
Lost to control	19%	—
Median lift when it won	not reported	—

Median traffic per variant was 2208 visitors. Most ran on homepages (27), product pages (5), content pages (2).

Every change type we can measure in Professional Services

change type	win rate in Professional Services	tests
Layout	25%	32 tests
Headline	13%	50+
Styling	12%	100+
Split URL	12%	50+
Body copy (this page)	11%	36 tests

The industry overview is at Professional Services benchmarks; rates across all industries are on the body copy benchmark.

What counts as a body copy test

Supporting paragraph text is rewritten, shortened or expanded. Headings, images and CTAs are untouched.

Control and variant wireframe for a body copy A/B test — Control on the left, variant on the right. Only the changed element is highlighted.

Body copy tests that won in Professional Services

Numbered list item describing a benefit: avoiding an in-person visit to the Social Security office
Added a new body copy paragraph describing the company as a specialist BNG advisory and unit provider, between the subhead and CTA button
statement positioning partnership with specialists as delivering streamlined platforms, higher visibility, and measurable growth
subheadline emphasizing easy at-home passport application with no office visits needed

Body copy tests that did not

membership pitch and feature list: headline offering TSA PreCheck plus related filing and future documents, subhead emphasizing one membership with unlimited filings and no per-document fees, followed by included and everything-you-can-file sections listing free filing, new or renewal, certified copies
variant adds a body copy section under the headline with survey stats and key findings, replacing the report badge and removing the cover image; also removed the decorative graphic shapes near the form
describes family plan features, pricing authorization, and savings for adding unlimited filings covering up to 4 members

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.