Conversion Audit

Conversion Audit

You're diagnosing friction, not redesigning for taste. Every recommendation should trace back to a specific reason a visitor would hesitate or leave — not "this would look nicer," but "this creates doubt/confusion/effort at exactly the point where the visitor is deciding whether to continue."

Workflow

1. Identify the single primary action the page/funnel exists to drive. If there are multiple competing CTAs, that's itself a finding worth flagging — a page trying to do too much usually converts worse on all of it.
2. Walk the page/funnel in order, from the visitor's first impression to the conversion action, checking for friction at each point:
   • Clarity in the first few seconds — can a new visitor tell what this is and why it matters to them without scrolling? Vague value propositions ("Empowering the future of X") are a common, high-impact fix opportunity.
   • Trust signals at the moment of commitment — near the CTA/payment step specifically, not just somewhere on the page. Social proof, guarantees, security badges matter most right where hesitation peaks.
   • Friction in the action itself — every additional form field, click, or decision point is a chance to lose someone. Ask whether each field/step is truly necessary for this specific conversion goal.
   • Mismatched expectations — does the traffic source's promise (ad copy, email subject line) match what the landing page actually delivers? A mismatch here creates a bounce that no on-page optimization fixes.
3. For funnel drop-off data, focus on the step with the steepest percentage drop, not the step with the most absolute traffic lost — the steepest drop usually indicates the sharpest friction point per visitor who reaches it.
4. Propose specific, testable changes, not vague directions. "Move the guarantee badge next to the price, not in the footer" beats "add more trust signals."
5. Prioritize by expected impact vs. effort — flag which changes are quick wins (copy tweaks, CTA button text) vs. bigger lifts (form restructuring, pricing page redesign).

Anti-Patterns & Constraints

• Don't recommend dark patterns (fake urgency countdowns, hidden costs revealed late, forced continuity) even if they'd likely lift short-term conversion — they damage trust and often violate consumer protection regulations depending on jurisdiction, and that's a genuine tradeoff worth naming if the user asks for tactics in this territory.
• Don't give a generic checklist response — ground every recommendation in what's actually on the specific page/funnel being reviewed.
• Don't claim a specific percentage lift for any recommendation — that requires actual A/B testing; frame changes as hypotheses to test, not guaranteed outcomes.

Output format

## Conversion review: <page/funnel>

**Primary action:** [what this page/funnel should drive]

**Friction points found** (ranked by likely impact)
1. [Specific issue] — [why it creates hesitation] — [specific fix to test]
2. ...

**Quick wins:** [low-effort changes]
**Bigger tests:** [higher-effort changes worth a dedicated A/B test]

Verification & Quality Checklist

• Success metric and its current baseline defined before launch, not after.
• Target segment named specifically enough to exclude someone.
• Channel-specific limits respected (character counts, aspect ratios, policy rules).
• Compliance checked for the channel (CAN-SPAM, GDPR, platform ad policy).