A/B test significance calculator
Compare observed conversion rates for a control and a variant. See the size of the difference, uncertainty around each rate and a two-sided test of equal rates.
For two independent groups with a fixed stopping plan and one preselected binary metric. Set the sample size or stopping date before launch and allow the same conversion window for both groups.
Compare two conversion rates
Use whole counts from two independent groups over the planned test period. Each visitor has one binary outcome and appears in only one group. Conversions cannot exceed visitors. The seed is hypothetical. Calculations stay in your browser; counts are not stored or sent to an AI service.
What the calculation means
Conversion rate is conversions divided by visitors. Absolute change is B − A in percentage points; relative uplift is (B − A) ÷ A and is undefined when A has zero conversions. The editable example gives 10% versus 13%: a 3 percentage point difference and 30% relative uplift. These are teaching inputs, not a forecast.
The test pools conversions across both groups under the null hypothesis that their true rates are equal. It divides B − A by √[p × (1 − p) × (1/nA + 1/nB)], then calculates the two-sided normal tail. No continuity correction is applied. This tool requires all four expected converted/nonconverted counts under that null to be at least 5; otherwise it withholds the p-value.
The 95% intervals use the Wilson score method for each individual group. They are approximate confidence intervals across repeated samples, not a 95% chance that the observed effect will recur. Very small p-values are shown in scientific notation; values below 1e−300 are reported as a bound, never as zero.
Check the experiment before choosing a variant
- Assign visitors randomly, keep groups mutually exclusive and check that exposure and outcome tracking are consistent. Repeat visits, clustered accounts and paired observations need a different model.
- Repeatedly checking results and stopping when p drops below 0.05 invalidates the fixed-horizon interpretation. Use a planned stopping rule or an appropriate sequential method.
- Testing many variants, metrics or segments increases false positives. This page shows one unadjusted comparison; it does not apply a multiple-testing correction.
- A small p-value does not establish a useful effect, profit or causality on its own. Review effect size, costs, guardrail metrics and experiment execution. Observational before/after counts do not become a randomized experiment here.
Method and sources
The formula follows NIST’s difference-of-proportions test. The interval method is documented in statsmodels’ Wilson interval reference. The expected-cell safeguard follows the large-sample guidance described in SciPy’s contingency-table documentation; the pooled z statistic squared equals the uncorrected 2×2 Pearson statistic. Methods checked October 17, 2026.
Before collecting data, use the A/B test idea generator to draft a question and primary metric. For acquisition economics, compare cost per lead and lead quality. Neither tool replaces an experiment design or forecasts conversion uplift.
Put the result to work
Practical guides, examples, and worksheets for this task.
- A/B testing: sample size, stopping rules and misleading results
Define test hypotheses, estimate sample size and choose stopping rules before launch. Includes formulas and examples for distinguishing reliable evidence from noisy conversion changes.
- Google AI Max: design a test around qualified leads
Build an AI Max experiment with a stable control, qualified-lead metrics, URL checks and a decision sheet. Includes an illustrative cost comparison.