Parallel Design Comparison Part II

This is the second of a three post article on a parallel design comparison. The first part of this article can be found here: Parallel Design Comparison

So if you have not voiced your opinion yet, only one of you have so far, it’s not too late to say what site will perform the best. I’ll be posting the answer in the third part. This post will give a basic review of each site, mentioning their selling points, and the steps a user would need to take to complete the desired goal. All three sites are credit card information sites that earn revenue by the visitors clicking on the optional cards they have listed.

0 Credit Card

The first site is 0 Credit Card.The site has two menus, one in the header, and left sidebar. Both menus link to the same pages so their may be some confusion for a visitor, but as the saying goes, all roads lead to Rome. When you click on one of the pages, depending on the visitors interest they are brought to a card information page. For example, you can look at their Reward Card page. The page offers a few paragraphs of advice, and then lists the available cards that offer the package.

So for this site to work, lets make a simple, easy for the site owner, assumption. Lets say that a visitor was looking for a Reward Card on Google. Google brings them directly to the Reward page, skipping the home page, and the visitor looks at it. What do you think they would do? My impression of the page would be that this is a credit card site, but it does not list any credit cards, at least at first impression. The cards are hidden below the fold. If this page is going to work, a visitor needs to get lucky finding the page, and then be lucky or intuitive enough to scroll further down. Most do not. My first guess for 0 Credit Card is that this site could be performing a lot better.

Credit Cards Comparison

The next site is Credit Cards Comparison. This site is in a blog format, offers similar information as 0 Credit Card, but starts out assuming that you are looking for a card. They have a great big side by side comparison of cards on the home page, and it is pretty much the first thing you see. Apply now buttons are right their as well so if a visitor came upon this sites home page all they would have to do is click one time, and the site could successfully convert. It could be a high converting site.

The downfall of this site is that if you were to Google looking for a reward card like the example I used for 0 Credit Cards, and you were directed to this sites Reward Card page, their are no cards to select. It is simply information about getting reward cards, and offers none to apply for. How will this site succeed? It will only work if the visitor is inclined t visit the home page.

Compare Credit Cards

The third site is Compare Credit Cards. This site would appear almost entirely as an advice site about credit cards. Their doesn’t appear to be any links to card sites with exception to just a sky scrapper banner ad on the right. The owner is still trying to fill this space, so a little hint here, this site is not performing the best, but to see an example, here is page that does have an ad: Prepaid Credit Cards. The idea that visitors will read the content, see that add, and then click it seems a bit dismal for me. I does have SEO potential though, so all is not lost.

Performance or Traffic

Looking at the three sites, all have some room for improvement. Some are performing better than others in regards to conversion, while some are performing better because their search engine traffic is superior. This is where the advantage of having a parallel design kicks in.  Find out what is doing what, and you will gain the benefits of parallel design.  These three sites could also very quickly transition from alright sites to great sites because the positives are found out quicker.

Part 3 of this post will reveal the real winner of these three sites, and some of the things they can now improve on. Have you told us what site you think is best? It’s not too late! Use the comment box below.