Rashid IqbalResearch · Aestho
UX, copy, and conversion research worth citing.
Distilled findings from the institutions whose research most often decides what gets shipped on a marketing site: NN/g, Baymard, ContentSquare, Microsoft Clarity, and Google. Each report links back to the original source.
How people read online: F-pattern and beyond — Nielsen Norman Group
NN/g's eye-tracking research, updated for 2025, shows that the F-pattern still dominates content-heavy pages, while card-grid pages produce a 'spotted' or layer-cake pattern. Direct implications for landing-page hierarchy.
79% · of users scan rather than read web pages (NN/g eye-tracking)
SaaS pricing page UX — Baymard Institute, 2025 large-scale study
Baymard's review of 1,200+ SaaS pricing pages found that 67% have at least one usability flaw severe enough to abandon a comparison. The four flaws that cost the most conversions are predictable.
67% · of SaaS pricing pages have at least one severe UX flaw (Baymard)
What gets attention on a webpage — Microsoft Clarity, 100M sessions analysed
Microsoft Clarity's 2024 aggregate study of 100M+ anonymised sessions reveals which page elements receive sustained attention vs scroll-past — and confirms hero copy is the single highest-impact element on a SaaS marketing page.
40-60% · of total attention on a marketing page lands in the hero (Clarity)
Page experience and conversion — Google Core Web Vitals, 2025 update
Google's 2025 Core Web Vitals report quantifies the conversion impact of LCP, INP, and CLS across e-commerce and SaaS. INP joining as a 2024 metric materially changed which sites win in mobile search.
+24% · lower abandonment on sites passing all 3 Core Web Vitals
Digital Experience Benchmarks 2025 — ContentSquare
ContentSquare's annual study analyses 9 trillion user actions across 4,200 brands. The 2025 edition is the largest UX-and-conversion benchmark report published — and the findings on conversion friction are striking.
51% · average bounce rate across SaaS marketing sites (ContentSquare 2025)