We commonly configure and govern VWO, Optimizely, and tag-manager-led setups; server-side or edge testing is scoped when client-side flicker or performance is a concern. If you already subscribe to a platform, we usually work within it rather than forcing migration — unless the current setup is unreliable. Evaluation covers consent integration, analytics alignment, staging workflows, and who can pause or promote tests. Documentation is written for your developers and marketers so the programme survives after our engagement. Tool cost remains yours; our fee covers setup, experiment design, implementation support, and read-outs.
Conversion
A/B testing programme
We set up testing tools, design experiments and interpret results so you know what to ship permanently.
Tool selection, hypothesis design and analysis you can act on.
What you get
- Tool setup and governance
- Hypothesis backlog
- Statistically sound tests
- Clear read-outs
Who an A/B testing programme is for
Structured A/B testing from Faraday Web Services suits teams that want decisions backed by data — not the highest-paid opinion in the room. You are a strong fit if you have enough traffic on key templates to run meaningful experiments, if stakeholders disagree on headlines or layouts, or if past “tests” lacked proper setup and nobody trusted the read-out.
Marketing and product leads use us when they need tooling governance, hypothesis discipline, and analysis they can ship from. We work alongside in-house teams and agencies; we are not here to replace your brand voice, but to make sure variants are implemented cleanly and results are interpreted honestly. If you have not yet diagnosed why pages underperform, start with conversion optimisation — testing amplifies a sound backlog, it does not invent one from thin air.
Single-page campaigns with one decisive change may be faster on dedicated landing pages. Broader site programmes often connect to custom website design or website redesign when templates need a stable foundation before variants multiply.
Benefits of a governed testing programme
A proper programme reduces wasted dev time: every experiment ties to a metric, runtime, and decision rule before code ships. Tooling is configured with consent-aware loading, exclusion rules for bots and internal users, and event integrity so conversions are counted once. You get a backlog ranked by impact and feasibility — not a queue of pet projects.
Statistical discipline matters. We plan sample sizes realistically, avoid peeking, and document when a test is inconclusive versus a true loss. Winners merge to production with notes for SEO and accessibility reviewers; losers are archived with lessons. When technical speed skews results, we coordinate performance optimisation instead of declaring victory on a faster broken page.
Testing pairs naturally with on-page SEO and SEO audit when variants touch titles or content — we protect indexation and internal links. For full-journey questions (email, ads, checkout), insights feed sales funnel design so experiments do not optimise one step while the funnel leaks elsewhere.
Tool setup you can maintain
We work with common platforms (VWO, Optimizely, Google Optimize successors, server-side options where appropriate) or your existing choice. Setup includes snippet or tag-manager deployment, audience definitions, integration with analytics, and QA checklists. Documentation explains how to pause tests, promote winners, and avoid conflicting experiments on the same URL.
Clear read-outs for leadership
Each cycle ends with a one-page summary: hypothesis, variants, runtime, primary and guardrail metrics, outcome, and recommended action. Guardrails might include bounce rate, scroll depth, or lead quality flags from CRM. The goal is a decision — ship, iterate, or stop — not a 40-slide deck that obscures a flat result.
How we run your testing programme
Engagements follow the studio standards described on our process page: scoped access, staging where possible, and written sign-offs. You work with senior practitioners who have shipped sites and CRO programmes — not analysts who only export tool dashboards.
Backlog, design, and implementation
We facilitate workshops or async reviews to capture hypotheses from analytics, replays, and sales feedback. Each item includes the change, target segment, primary metric, minimum runtime, and implementation owner. Design and copy variants respect brand guidelines; dev work is tracked on staging with preview links for approvers.
Launch, monitor, and conclude
Before go-live we verify tracking, mutual exclusion between tests, and mobile behaviour. During the run we monitor for sample ratio mismatch and broken variants. At conclusion we apply agreed significance rules, check guardrails, and schedule merges or rollbacks. Learnings update the backlog and inform wider CRO priorities.
What influences pricing
A/B programmes are quoted on traffic tier, number of concurrent tests, implementation depth (front-end vs CMS vs server-side), markets and languages, and whether Faraday builds variants or advises your team. Tool licensing is usually client-owned; we scope setup and governance. Low-traffic sites may be better served by a CRO audit and directional changes — we say so upfront rather than selling tests that cannot conclude.
Retainers suit continuous experimentation; fixed setups suit a tool migration or first three experiments after a redesign. Proposals list deliverables, meeting rhythm, and exclusions (for example media buying or full site copy rewrites).
Use the free quote form or contact page. Browse the services catalogue to compare testing with conversion optimisation and funnel design.
UK agency, European clients
Faraday Web Services Ltd delivers A/B testing remotely from the United Kingdom for clients in the UK, France, Belgium, and Switzerland. English and French reporting keeps marketing and leadership aligned when campaigns cross borders. Consent banners, analytics storage choices, and form patterns are configured with EU expectations in mind — not as an afterthought when a test goes live in Paris or Brussels.
Multi-locale sites need clear rules: which URLs test per language, how hreflang pages are excluded from conflicting variants, and how results aggregate for HQ. We coordinate with on-page SEO when tests touch search-sensitive elements. Background on the agency is on about; policies on legal information.
Why teams choose Faraday for testing
You get implementers who understand code, analytics, and commercial context — the same seniors behind custom websites and landing pages. We refuse false certainty: if runtime is too short or traffic too thin, we extend or recommend a different method. Optional AI integrations can support analysis summaries, always reviewed by humans before decisions.
Common engagement questions appear on the site FAQ. When you need evidence before the next redesign committee, testing is how marketing and product agree on what ships permanently.
Ship what works — retire what does not
A/B testing is how organisations stop relitigating the same hero every quarter. With governance, QA, and honest read-outs, experiments become a library of decisions — not forgotten toggles in a tool. Pair with CRO for diagnosis, or SEO audit when organic traffic must grow before tests can breathe.
Ready to stand up or rescue a testing programme? Request a free quote. We will confirm tooling, traffic reality, and a sensible first experiment list within one business day where information allows.
Frequently asked questions
Runtime depends on traffic, baseline conversion rate, and the minimum detectable effect you care about — not a calendar default of two weeks. We estimate duration at design time and set stop rules to reduce peeking bias. Seasonality matters for B2B: a test started on a holiday week may need extension. We monitor for broken variants and sample imbalance. If significance is not reachable in a reasonable window, we call it early with a clear “inconclusive” label and recommend next steps — often a bolder change or fixing tracking instead of leaving a test limping for months.
Yes. Implementation paths differ: visual editors, theme templates, CMS fields, or component-level swaps. We prefer changes that are reversible and documented — not ad-hoc edits that break on the next plugin update. Staging environments are used when available; otherwise we schedule low-traffic windows and monitor errors. For headless or static stacks, server-side or edge assignment may be appropriate. The constraint is maintainability and clean analytics, not a specific brand of CMS — we adapt to what you run in production. Before the first test goes live, we agree who owns merges and how variants are retired so your codebase stays understandable six months later.
Conversion optimisation is the wider discipline: diagnosis, prioritisation, UX and copy improvements, and tests where volume allows. A/B testing focuses on experiment design, tooling, statistical read-out, and merging winners. If your backlog is empty or analytics untrusted, CRO should come first. If you already know what to try but lack rigour or governance, a testing programme fills the gap. Many clients engage Faraday for both over time — CRO feeds hypotheses; testing validates them. Neither replaces a weak offer or broken funnel end to end.
Poorly implemented client-side tools can slow pages or cause flicker; we mitigate with async loading, exclusions, and performance budgets. SEO-sensitive changes (titles, H1, core copy) are reviewed before launch; major URL experiments use redirects and monitoring. We watch guardrail metrics during tests. If a variant wins on conversion but hurts LCP, we investigate before permanent merge. Coordinating with {link:on-page-seo|on-page SEO} prevents accidental noindex or duplicate content issues. The aim is measurable uplift without trading away discoverability or mobile experience. We document any temporary SEO risk in the test brief so stakeholders approve trade-offs consciously rather than discovering them after launch.
We do, with adjusted expectations. Classic A/B tests on 500 monthly sessions rarely settle quickly on small button tweaks. We may use sequential testing approaches, combine segments carefully, or prioritise larger UX changes measured before/after. Sometimes the honest answer is qualitative research plus implementation rather than a six-week split. We will not sell inconclusive tests as success. Pairing with {link:conversion-optimisation|CRO} often unlocks bigger lifts than micro-variants anyway. Traffic growth from {link:seo-audit|SEO audit} work can later justify a fuller programme.
Scope is flexible. Faraday can implement variants during the test and merge winners into the CMS or codebase; your team can own dev with our specs and QA checklists. Merge includes removing test snippets, cleaning duplicate content, and verifying analytics events on the champion. We document what changed so future redesigns do not unknowingly revert gains. Handover training covers how to launch the next test without breaking the last winner — a common failure mode in maturing programmes. If your internal queue is busy, we can time merges to sprint boundaries so production stays stable and marketing knows exactly when the champion goes live.
Begin with your site URL, approximate monthly sessions on priority pages, current tooling, and one or two decisions you need evidence for. We review analytics health, propose tooling fixes if needed, and suggest a first experiment trio or a setup-only phase. Access typically includes CMS or repo staging, tag manager, and analytics. Quote via {link:devis|free quote} or {link:contact|contact}; compare offerings in {link:services|services}. We respond within one business day with clarifying questions or a ballpark when scope is clear. A short discovery call is enough to confirm whether you need setup-only, full programme support, or pairing with {link:conversion-optimisation|CRO} first.
Ready to get started?
Tell us about your project — we reply within one business day with a no-obligation quote.
Request a quote Contact