Run your first Jurni A/B test
Use this playbook when you have one clear question you want real traffic to answer. The objective is not to create the most different variant possible. It is to make one meaningful change, hold the important context steady, and measure the outcome that best reflects the hypothesis.The Jurni experiment model
At a marketer level, the flow is: Campaign URL / Smart Link → Jurni assigns a variant → shopper sees that experience → Jurni attributes the session and outcome → you compare variants. The Smart Link is the stable URL used to split experiment traffic. If you connect an existing Smart Link that is already receiving campaign traffic, that traffic becomes part of the experiment routing.Step 1: write a hypothesis that explains the customer decision
Use:Step 2: choose a metric that matches the hypothesis
Common experiment metrics currently available in Jurni include Sessions, Orders, Revenue, CTR, CVR, Add-to-Cart Rate, Checkout Rate, AOV, and RPS. For a marketer:- CVR — use when the question is primarily about purchase conversion.
- RPS — use when the change can affect both conversion and order value and you care about revenue per session.
- AOV — use when the hypothesis is specifically about basket size among purchasers.
- CTR / Add-to-Cart / Checkout Rate — useful for earlier journey behavior and diagnostics.
Step 3: make a controlled duplicate
Create a separate experience for the new variant so the control remains intact. Then prompt Jurni:Step 4: create the experiment
In Jurni, create an experiment and choose whether to create a new Smart Link or use an existing Smart Link. For a new campaign, creating a new Smart Link gives you a fresh campaign URL. For an existing campaign, using the existing Smart Link lets the experiment take over traffic already reaching that link. Confirm this is what you want before activating the test. Add the control and variant experiences and set the intended traffic weights. For exact product controls, see Create an experiment.Step 5: test the link before sending traffic
Open the exact Smart Link. Check:- it resolves successfully
- campaign/query parameters are retained as intended
- both variants are valid published experiences
- important product and purchase actions work on both
- tracking is not duplicated
- mobile behavior is correct
Step 6: let the test answer the question you wrote
Avoid changing the variant mid-test unless you are correcting a real bug. A material page change after traffic has already entered means the variant no longer represents one stable treatment across the whole date range. If you discover a serious issue, document the correction and consider whether a fresh test window is cleaner.Step 7: interpret results without inventing certainty
Start with the original hypothesis and primary metric. Ask:- Which variant leads on the primary metric?
- How large is the observed difference?
- Is the date range representative of the campaign?
- Are traffic volumes balanced as expected?
- Do diagnostic metrics help explain where behavior changed?
- Could offer, traffic source, campaign mix, or another concurrent change confound the comparison?
Prompt: summarize the result responsibly
Step 8: decide what to keep
A winning page is not just a URL to archive. Turn the result into a reusable learning:“For cold Meta traffic on the convenience angle, explicit message match in the hero outperformed the broader brand headline during this test.”That learning is more useful than “Variant B won.” Use it to inform the next campaign, then test whether the lesson generalizes.
What good looks like
A good first experiment has:- one clear customer hypothesis
- one primary metric chosen before the result
- a control that remains intact
- a variant with one meaningful intended difference
- a tested Smart Link
- enough context to interpret the result responsibly
- an explicit next learning