Sr. Growth Manager @ ActiveCampaign | Institutional Consultant | Founder

Casey is a growth veteran, with over a decade of experience in helping software companies scale fast. 

Whether it's garnering 28,000,000+ views across Linkedin, Reddit and Quora, or pioneering new growth levers (like booking his team on hundreds of podcasts), Casey is always looking for creative and value-led ways to grab attention and break from the mold. In his current role leading marketing at DoWhatWorks, he is looking to reshape how brands split test and experiment online. 

On the consulting side, Casey has worked with some of the world's biggest firms including places like McKinsey, Blackrock, Colemans, GLG, Guidepoint, etc., where he provides institutional guidance to PE/VC teams around topics such as: SMB marketing vendor selection, SaaS pricing, SaaS marketing/CRM tool differentiation, market analysis, inbound marketing, conversion rate optimization and marketing automation.

Casey also teaches classes at UCSD and Stanford extension around demand creation, email marketing and content marketing.

I run a Substack that does analysis on the world's top websites based on our proprietary database of A/B test results: https://dowhatworks.substack.com/

Current areas of extensive experience...

-> B2B SaaS / B2B Enterprise SaaS / SMB SaaS

-> CRO (Conversion Rate Optimization) / Website optimization

-> Email marketing

-> Content marketing (especially LinkedIn and Reddit)

-> B2B Influencer marketing

-> Pricing optimization

MongoDB is the only company I’ve seen do this ⬇️

They have an “experience” selector at the top that’s tied to their two main ICPs: Developers and Business Leaders.

When you choose one, it completely changes the sections, the copy, and even the CTAs.

For example: in the hero, if you’re a developer, you can jump straight into the documentation. But for business leaders, that hero CTA becomes Pricing instead.

This is the future (and it’s similar to a great website element I covered last week from Sage who segmented on industry/size vs. role).

Most websites bury the “who this is for” affinity, or the “how it works for XYZ persona” section way down the page (I’m guilty of this myself).

What does the DoWhatWorks data say? 💡Looking at hundreds of tests around personalization and persona-focused positioning, I consistently see these variants win (over outcome-focused copy and many other approaches).

Especially for enterprise brands selling to complex buying committees with very different needs (developers, legal, marketing, CFO, etc.), this makes the experience exponentially more relevant for the prospect.

Imagine the gap between what a developer wants to see and what a VP of marketing/sales/finance would want to see. Night and day. 

Great work from the MongoDB team and as more brands test plays like this and see dramatic conversion lifts, it’ll become more and more mainstream.

Casey Hill

Casey is a growth veteran, with over a decade of experience in helping software companies scale fast. 

Whether it's garnering millions of views on Quora and Linkedin, or pioneering new growth levers (like booking his team on hundreds of podcasts), Casey is always looking for creative and value-led ways to grab attention and break from the mold. In his current role leading growth at ActiveCampaign, he is building organic growth engines to propel the team to $1,000,000,000 in ARR.

On the consulting side, Casey works with some of the world's biggest firms including places like McKinsey, Blackrock, Colemans, GLG, Guidepoint, etc., where he provides institutional guidance to PE/VC teams around topics such as: SMB marketing vendor selection, SaaS pricing, SaaS marketing/CRM tool differentiation, market analysis, inbound marketing, and marketing automation.

Chief Marketing Officer @ DoWhatWorks | Institutional Consultant | Founder

Glean is the only company I’ve seen do this ⬇️

On their homepage, they have an interactive section where you can drag any of their connectors, and it shows you exactly how Glean works with that platform.

It’s simple and personalized to the prospect’s needs in the moment, without breaking the flow or making them dig.

This speaks to a larger problem I see in SaaS.

A huge portion of websites have integration sections on their homepages that say something like: “Connect with 500+ other tools you use.”

But you don’t know how they connect. 

You don’t know if they’re native integrations or if you need third-party software. You don’t know if they’re one-way or bidirectional.

I like that Glean uses the word “native” specifically in their subheader, and then when you slide a tool over, you can see exactly how they work together.

Other brands like ActiveCampaign have tags that indicate whether an integration is “bi-directional” and how it works.

Or Clay uses icons for native (signal + action) integrations to make it clear (you can select to only look at these too from a dropdown)

These are helpful.

Today, one of the biggest barriers to switching or getting started is data migration and integrations. 

If you make it clear how easily and deeply you can work with a prospect’s existing tech stack, you fast-track the deal.

Kudos to Glean.

This is my favorite homepage experiment I have seen this year ⬇️

Sage has an element at the top of their hero that says “Explore Custom Solutions” and asks for industry and team size. 

If you add your info, it takes you to a new custom homepage completely tailored to your specifics. 

I am a SaaS organization so I see things related to SaaS metrics, social proof from SaaS companies, regulations and needs focused on software companies. 

It’s a vastly improved experience and generates affinity for the exact challenges I face. 

So many brands talk about the importance of “personalization” but include lots of non-personalized info. 

Enterprise security features that speak to only 5% of your site traffic. 

Testimonials where you have to dig to find one related to your industry.

Customer logo bars with only one logo you recognize and it’s for a company 100x your size. 

Brands could easily build this experience, even if it’s just for your top 2-3 industries.

In fact, most brands at scale already have most of these specialized industry pages, they are just hidden in the navigation. So the job is simply to make them more accessible. 

What does the data say 💡: I looked at DoWhatWorks’s database of A/B tests and found dozens related to more persona/role/stage-based personalization. These win at a high percentage. Although Sage is the only company I have seen put the customization bar right at the top like this, I can infer from the data I am looking at that this is likely a winning play, and likely to improve conversions.

Clay University is a crazy growth story (they are driving 800+ people per cohort) ⬇️

Since HubSpot popularized it almost a decade ago, hundreds of SaaS brands have been launching their own “[brand] university”.

It’s typically a repository of a lot of general educational content, and as someone behind the scenes of a lot of these universities… they tend to be expensive, multi-quarter flops.

I think the failures of these “content universities” stem from a few core things…

1) They lack focus. Is the purpose to convert free to paid traffic? Is it a lead magnet? Is it to reduce churn? Is it for prospects or customers?

2) Why not just a blog or YouTube? If I have to sign up for a “course” simply to get content that feels like a lead magnet or blog article, that doesn’t inspire me to engage more. 

3) The navigation sucks. As these big brands try to stuff hundreds of content pieces into a university, it is always a headache to navigate to what’s relevant.

But Clay is crushing it here. How?

I went behind the scenes with Sara Lundberg, head of brand at Clay, and one of the pioneers behind Clay University, to learn how they built the machine.

→ They launched a cohort-focused system. While you can self-serve Clay University, they realized the accountability and community that comes from being part of a cohort with other like-minded folks. You have a set kick-off date, assignments, and you have chat access to instructors.

→ They focus on the product lane. Instead of a general amalgamation of everything related to their category, they focus on Clay as a product, but from a usecase angle, so they get straight into the pain points folks have, and straight into building.

→ They built virality loops into the curriculum. When you sign up, they give you 2000 comped credits so you can do the set-ups covered in the class, but then when you share those builds on social, you get 500 more credits. So they create a system where they not only are training and creating more sticky users, but they are leveraging UGC (User Generated Content) to create an inbound flywheel.

→ They add the search bar to the top of everything. Navigation is one of the most impactful (and often undervalued) parts of webpage design. By having the search integrated into everything, you help users stay on track, find what they need, and not have to go digging around.

Lots that companies can take away from Clay’s playbook here.

PS. I feel like a tech journalist sometimes. And I love it.

I looked at over 50 competitor comparison pages. PostHog had the best ⬇️

Let me start by saying that most competitor comparison pages are dreadful.

They are dishonest (like factually inaccurate about the competitors).

They are misleading. They don’t build trust. They treat the prospect like they are dumb.

And here is the kicker… they don’t convert. 

I have worked with a handful of marketing teams (startups to at-scale orgs) who have shifted retargeting budget away from competitor comparison pages because the CPA was just too high (one spent $800k/m for a quarter and had just 7 sales at a 5-figure ACV)

It makes sense to educate prospects about your strengths (and even mention competitor weaknesses), but the framing is what is killing all these pages.

With Posthog, they do several things that build trust and buck the trend:

1) When describing a competitor, they quote how the competitor describes themselves. No misrepresenting or trying to paint them into a certain box. Just be straightforward.

2) They include a “what people like about [competitor]” and “What people don’t like about [competitor] and then include quotes from reviews (I think they pull from G2). And the real part that builds trust is that they include honest positives. Not weird, fake compliments, “this is a perfect software if you are an enterprise org with 5,000+ employees and a $12 million a month budget for all the consultants you will need”. Just actual strengths. It then makes the weaknesses that they bring up next feel way more realistic. 

Ultimately, the most effective competitor comparisons start with honesty.

That in and of itself is so rare, it’s disarming, and builds trust and confidence in whatever you say next. 

Have you read a competitor comparison that really resonated (or created one that converted really well)?

Mercury is one of the best at this in the fintech space ⬇️

Specificity in product section sub headers. 

1.5% cashback.

3.8% yield on treasuries.

Integrations with QuickBooks, Xero, or NetSuite.

That is what gets folks to stop the scroll and engage. 

If you say “Keep everyone on the same page with smart accounting automation” or “Streamline your expense management with AI-powered insights”... That leaves me with very little material information to engage on.

Simple test 💡: If you are a fintech or B2B SaaS brand, add specific numbers to your product section subheaders and make sure you have heatmapping on. 

Study click through, meaningful engagements and dwell time on these sections.

We are entering a new age in how prospects expect to interact with websites. 

More and more, we see top brands leading in the hero with an AI assistant / LLM looking input box.

Versus the bottom-right chatbots that are most associated with support or routing you to sales, the new interface in the hero feels materially different. 

It feels like a natural part of the website.

When you type something into Lovable, there is a curated experience, guiding you to your desired output.

When you type something into MongoDB assistant, it cites the exact web pages, documentation, and blog articles connected to your query (cleanly tagged for you to reference).

Where we are headed to me feels clear. 

Websites in 2027 will start with an input box and assemble the website based on your request. 

They will kick off by asking you some clarifying questions (like a Lovable does), and then once they have enough context, they will build you a personalized web page that matches exactly to your query (based off all the content that already exists on the page, and maybe enhanced by the thousands of pieces of content your executives have pulbished on social or spoken about on podcasts)

Do you think this is where we are headed?

Why are logo bars + quote testimonials losing, but case studies + video testimonials are winning on websites?

I recently sat down with Ethan Decker, biologist turned marketer, who talked through the science behind some interesting findings around social proof. 

He explained that “cost signaling” might be at play here. 

The idea comes from nature, where an animal like an elk spends a lot of energy and resources to build impressive antlers. It’s a signal that can’t be easily copied by a less genetically fit elk.

In B2B, we often see that plain logo bars, star ratings, and quote testimonials lose in A/B testing. 

One reason might be that these signals are easy to fake. Anyone can put down any logo on their site, or pull a quote from an imaginary source (or a past customer from 7 years ago).

Meanwhile, if you have a video testimonial of an executive at Orangetheory (like Webflow does) talking about your product and the benefits, that gives you a lot more credibility. Ramp does the same thing. 

Or Clay has logos from OpenAI and Google linked to case studies. Now the logos can be validated.

Bottom line is: The easier it is to fake, the less credibility it carries.

Stripe, one of the most recognizable fintech companies, completely rehauled their homepage today ⬇️

A major theme of the overhaul is an upmarket focus on enterprise (and SaaS): 

→ statements around “50% of Fortune 100 companies use Stripe” / CTAs reading “Stripe for Enterprise” / “From the Fortune 100 to the Forbes Cloud 100, vertical SaaS platforms use Stripe”

→ lots of positioning around “financial infrastructure” / “custom revenue models” / “agentic commerce” / “Reliable, extensible infrastructure for every stack”

→ lots of statements around volume and reliability, “Stripe processed more than $40B for businesses while maintaining a 99.9999% uptime.” / Live global GDP counter is in the homepage eyebrow ticking up from 1.5% 

There are also lots of small changes (many tied to SaaS/fintech best practices), like they added a second CTA to their hero section or they made their logo bar clickable.

Overall, this is not a surprising move. 

Many large, at-scale brands follow this path (I highlighted Asana leaning their positioning into enterprise about a year ago).

And for brands with category dominance and expansive name recognition, it typically seems to work (meaning the new targeting converts a greater percentage of enterprise buyers while not substantially atrophying more SMB buyers).

The playbook for brands looking to get more enterprise customers is to focus your page positioning around…

Uptime, integrations, SOC-2 or other compliance certifications, massive volume processed, robust infrastructure, agentic capabilites and peer-level social proof (we work with Fortune 100 like you).

What do you think about the new Stripe homepage?

I wanted to curate a list of top SaaS/fintech websites for folks to draw inspiration from by type (i.e. homepage hero, pricing pages, AI positioning, etc.) ⬇️

Great homepage heroes to look at: Sundial, MongoDB, Wispr Flow, Pally
 
Great product blocks to look at: Ramp, Mercury, Public

Great pricing pages to look at: Fin, Stripe, Gusto, Figma, Notion

Great social proof sections: Clay, Linear, Warmly, Stripe

Great novelty AI sections/pages: Wispr Flow, Wynter

Good agentic positioning: Docket

Good scroll animation: Marqeta

Top creativity: Posthog, Wispr Flow, Air

Best integration section: Glean

Best Transparency: Buffer

Best competitor comparisons: Posthog

Know any other exceptional B2B websites that would fit into these categories?
 
Comment below, and if they are truly s-tier, I am happy to edit this post and add them to the list.

Gamma is the only company I have seen do this ⬇️

With their pricing plans, they put “no credit card required” above the actual plan name (the Free plan in this case). 

It’s the first thing my eye notices, and I immediately register that when I go on to look at the rest of the plan.

Now using “popular” or similar is common in SaaS (although I always felt it was a bit contrived). 

But I like the broader concept of using these headers to signal something meaningful. 

You could imagine an enterprise plan could lead with SOC-2 compliant or SSO.

We know from extensive DoWhatWork A/B testing data that many brands test into reassurance text below CTAs (see websites like Kit, Zapier, Twilio, Monday, etc.). 

While Gamma’s implementation on a pricing page is unique, it makes sense to me that this would be effective as a quick contextualization or important orienting detail.

What do you think?

Gusto’s blog articles get cited/shared more often than larger competitors ⬇️

I think there are three main reasons:

1) They include highly shareable visuals/charts. Whether you’re a startup or a brand at scale, you can learn from Gusto’s approach here: do first-hand research and include lots of data-rich charts (with your brand as the source and your logo plastered on them). This is how you get wide distribution. (Pro tip: this works on social channels like LinkedIn too. Ask Rand Fishkin)

2) They go deep on industry expertise. They have an in-house PhD economist writing content on labor markets and topics directly related to the niche in which Gusto operates. When you become a go-to hub for your space, for your category, that’s how you start to own mindshare. It’s remarkable how many brands miss this and stay strictly bottom-of-funnel with their content. 

My prediction: more and more brands are going to invest in topical experts / industry-focused journalists in 2026. Beyond the company website we will see an explosion of Substacks, Mediums and similar with expert insights, “The Future of Labor by [insert brand]”

3) They have dedicated resource sections for expert insights, company how-tos, and company news. “Blog” is a vanilla term that can mean a dozen different things. From testing I’ve seen, when brands segment like Gusto does here, and make the expectation-to-reality crystal clear, they get far stronger engagement.

Great work from the Gusto team. If you’re looking to get your blog cited more often, take a look at what Gusto does in their Insights section.

Lovable is one of the marquee examples of community-led growth in 2026 ⬇️

Everyone talks about “community” but few brands are really leaning into it as a GTM lever.

Lovable is crushing it here.

Not only have they created curated communities for folks to share and learn, on places like Reddit and Discord, but they are also hosting live events. 

They are enabling user meet-ups. 

They are building ambassador programs. 

Since HubSpot, they are one of the best I have seen in SaaS at this. 

One common thread I have found across brands that effectively build community is that the company has to provide the support, structure, and curation to keep the quality bar high. 

It’s never more critical than when you are at your first 100 folks, and people are checking to see 1) is this community actually active? and 2) is there promotion or spam that signals low quality?

As a brand, you need to closely monitor and make sure you have a steady stream of great content and no spam.

Over time, communities become a force in and of themselves, a flywheel that self-sustains, but you need to have your hand on the pulse in the early days to get lift off. 

This quote from Elena Verna, on Lovables' growth team, about community-led growth captures their focus here perfectly, 

“Your users become your distribution channel, but only if you build the infrastructure for it. Your product has to create stories worth sharing. But also give them a place to show their work, staff it so questions actually get answered, and let users teach each other - the best content explaining your product never comes from marketing. And when it works, community creates trust that marketing budgets can’t buy: users believe in your product because other people they respect believe in it. Features are easy to copy. Trust isn’t.”

The fastest-growing brands in B2B not only have great products, but they are nailing distribution. They are winning in the attention economy. 

If you want to go deeper on community in 2026, take some time to look at Lovable’s playbook.

Fin made a small tweak to their pricing page. One line item. But it shows they “get it”  ⬇️

The first thing they list is “Set up in under an hour”

Today in SaaS, one of the biggest barriers to picking up software is the pain of the switch.

The migration, the setup, the integrations.

It’s why brands like Ramp tested into a block on their website that shows their setup timeline.

It’s why brands like Linear built a detailed “here is the step-by-step of what switching looks like”

It’s why brands like Kit added reassurance subtext in their hero that says “free migrations”

The more specific you get, the better.

Saying setup is seamless/easy/painless is a throwaway statement. 

Meanwhile, Linear saying “Most teams run a 4-6 week pilot with 1-2 teams alongside their existing tool”. That sets an expectation. 

Your buyers are busy. They want the system humming but they don’t look forward to the headache of it all. 

Take away the headache and watch your conversions skyrocket.

I lined up a call with a top executive to talk through their A/B testing learnings. 

Then it went completely off course…

Them: “Yeah I ran a bunch of tests this quarter. Nothing works. Headline tests, section tests, button tests. None of it moved the needle. Not a focus area any more”.

I listened and took it all in. I had all these notes. 

All this data to compare against their test results. These follow up questions lined up to get into the “why it won”. 

But none of it worked for them. It wasn't even that the variants "lost", they just were the same. They didn't matter.

We still had a nice chat, but after I got to analyzing his situation.

I realized the experience of this exec is actually exceptionally common. 

Optimizely published data saying that 90% of A/B tests "lose" (as in the variant doesn’t show any statistical difference so they stay with the control).

A big part of the problem stems from how we approach testing. 

1. Do we really understand where our traffic comes from and how that impacts positioning? If your traffic comes from paid retargeting ads or if it comes from dark social, what resonates will be very different.

2. Do we design A/B tests with a specific, unified problem we are trying to solve for? Many brands just do a dozen homepage hero headline variants and try and see what wins. But the question always has to be what problem are you solving for? Everything should ladder up to that.

3. Are you testing things that are meaningful? A big gap I found from my chat with that executive was a lack of “meaningful testing”. This means you try 10 copy variants but none of them a) introduce new information or b) provide new direct value. 

I am teaming up with the incredible team from GrowthX AI this Thursday (9AM PST) to do a workshop, where we will get deep into how to better convert your web traffic in 2026. 

Not only will we look at specific A/B tests from dozens of the top brands in the world, but we will address what to test, and how to think about your website in an age of AI discovery.

Data shows that having a fallback option in your demo flow (like a direct call number or product tour) can improve overall traffic conversions ⬇️

I stumbled on this interesting analysis from our research team.

They focused on brands experiencing drop-off at various points in their demo flows, and on different ways to mitigate that.

One approach that has proven effective, used by top brands like Slack, is offering a fallback option.

In Slack’s case, they present a demo form and also include a phone number for prospects who want to talk to someone immediately.

We live in an age where people want answers and access faster than ever. Make a prospect wait a week for a demo when they want to move now, and you’ll likely lose the deal.

The calendar stage is a common point of high drop-off. Sometimes it’s a localization or coverage issue. Sometimes it’s an expectation mismatch.

Regardless, having a way to still engage people who don’t want to book is smart.

Another route we’re seeing brands test is offering an interactive product tour. 

If someone wasn’t planning to talk to a sales rep, they often drop off when a Calendly link appears, but this fallback can directly save prospects who would otherwise abandon the demo flow and have to go dig for a product tour elsewhere.

Kudos to the Slack team for this best practice.

Wise is one of the few fintech brands that establishes a clear “why us” ⬇️

Most brands rattle off what they do and how their features work, but there isn’t a clear contrast to the status quo, or other solutions, or even the broader problems in the space.

Wise tackles that head-on by saying “Banks and other providers inflate the mid-market exchange rate to hide fees and make you pay more”. 

Not only do they make that claim and position Wise against that status quo, but they do two powerful things to build trust around the claims.

1) They note you will always get a fair rate, “like the one on Google”. This encourages prospects to check rates via a trusted third party (Google) and that builds a lot of confidence.

2) The visual they use specifically shows rates against the other major players like Wells Fargo or Paypal, which further drives home their point. 

When we talk about building “trust” with a prospect on the site, I often find it isn’t the logo bar or the three-line testimonial quote that does this.

It’s things like this: expose an industry problem, talk about how you address it better than others, then PROVE it by showing it in action and inviting folks to validate it via a trusted third-party source.

Great work from the Wise website team for this.

There is a major problem across AI companies selling agentic products ⬇️

They are unbelievably vague in their messaging. 

I curated a list of 30 top companies selling agents. 

Here are the headlines…

Company A: “We are a frontier research and deployment company providing enterprises with a powerful, cost-efficient, and easy-to-adopt technology to integrate agentic AI directly into their core workflows and processes.”

Company B: “Deploy, orchestrate, and govern fleets of specialized AI agents that work alongside your team”

Company C: “Ops teams can build and manage an entire AI workforce in one powerful visual platform.”

Company D: “[company] is the simplest way for businesses to create, manage, and share agents.”

It took me until company eight on the list that I got one that actually gave me any real information about what it did.

Company H: “Docket's AI agent handles qualification, discovery, and booking while you sleep. Teams see 30%+ more qualified pipeline from the same traffic.”

I understand these brands want the optics of addressing a large TAM, but when you can go to ten sites, and the headlines are almost identical, this isn’t providing any clarity or insight that is helping prospects decide on your product.

What does the data say 💡: I looked at DoWhatWorks database of hundreds of A/B tests around AI messaging. Tests from brands like OpenAI, IBM, Hootsuite, GoDaddy, Notion, and beyond. The takeaway is clear → AI messaging that is clear and explanatory to the capability it solves for (i.e. our support agents provide 24/7 ticket coverage in 42 languages) dramatically outperforms vague or sweeping messaging.

Marqeta has the smoothest scroll animation I’ve seen in SaaS/fintech ⬇️

The physical card you see in the hero flows through the rest of the page.

It looks nifty, but what does the data say about how these types of effects perform?

The pros…

1) It typically increases scroll depth + dwell time on the homepage. I’ve worked with multiple clients over the last few years who have used scroll animations, and when executed well, they draw the eye down the page and contribute to effective storytelling. We know from the data that a sense of “progression” improves scroll + engagement on a page.

Note: Scroll animations that lock you into a frame until the animation completes are much more disruptive and often perform poorly.

2) It can anchor attention where you want it on the page. Having a moving object like this allows you to more tightly guide the prospect’s eye, which can be valuable, especially if your page is visually dense.

3) It can make the page more memorable. Let’s be honest: for the vast majority of SaaS and fintech sites, they’re not memorable. You have outliers like PostHog that are so unique they stick in your head, but in general, dozens of large vendors blur together in a prospect’s memory. Adding a unique experience like Marqeta does here (I would guess) increases recall.

The cons…

4) When executed poorly, it’s distracting. When the novelty starts to pull attention away from the actual content, you might get a higher scroll percentage but less clicks. I find this is often the case with complex scroll animations where lots of things happen concurrently.

5) There are usability concerns. Excessive zooming or jumping around on the screen can be disorienting and off-putting for some prospects. I remember working with a client a few years ago who had a scroll animation where multiple products all pulled onto the screen at once and after a month of testing, we removed it because it caused the bounce rate to spike at that section.

Overall, I think Marqeta’s execution is simple and clean. It supports storytelling on the page and makes the physical card component of their offering more memorable.

Toast is the only company I have seen do this ⬇️

Below their primary demo CTA, they have another CTA that reads “Under 10 employees? → Shop Now”

A few years back, I got to work with some of the Toast content/email team (when teaching a class at UCSD), and I remember one area of focus was how to segment different business types for best relevance.

I imagine this off-ramp CTA for small restaurants leads to less overload on Toast’s primary demo flow and a better experience for smaller brands who are going to be using a more limited set-up. 

Win-win. 

It’s also part of this broader trend I am seeing across tons of top organizations which is tackle persona/affinity early on.

Toast has that persona routing option right here in the hero.

Carta does it right below the hero.

MongoDB has an “experience” toggle that personalizes by persona at the hero.

Sage allows you to submit your industry/size to be routed to the most relevant page.

The A/B test data I see at DoWhatWorks consistently shows that persona-oriented positioning wins out versus outcome-focused messaging, everywhere from the homepage to pricing pages. 

Kudos to Toast for this play.

taplio

Casey Hill's Linkedin Analytics

Casey Hill

Performance ScoreCasey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

What is Casey talking about?

Who is engaging with Casey

Casey Hill's Best Posts (last 30 days)

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

taplio

.css-6ytdur{background-image:linear-gradient(284deg, rgba(39, 43, 72, 1) 0%, rgba(33, 47, 183, 1) 100%);color:transparent;-webkit-background-clip:text;background-clip:text;}Casey Hill's Linkedin Analytics

Casey Hill

Performance Score.css-goub6s{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:500;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);display:block;margin-top:var(--chakra-space-1);}Casey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

What is Casey talking about?

Who is engaging with Casey

Casey Hill's Best Posts .css-1emoo84{font-size:var(--chakra-fontSizes-md);font-weight:400;color:var(--chakra-colors-gray-600);}(last 30 days)

Ready to grow your LinkedIn presence?

Casey Hill's Linkedin Analytics

Performance ScoreCasey Hill's LinkedIn Performance

Casey Hill's Best Posts (last 30 days)