Need-Based Product Finder vs Best Sellers: $17.8K/Month Case Study

More products doesn't mean more sales. Sometimes it means more confusion.

We tested the second fold on the homepage of an 8-figure dog treats brand. The control showed their most loved products. Ratings, prices, quick shop buttons. Standard stuff.

The problem? Too many treats, no guidance on which one to pick.

The winner? A need-based product finder. Four categories: Powerful Chewers, Picky Eaters, Sensitive Stomachs, Training Rewards. Tell us your dog, we'll tell you the treat.

Results: +$17,813/mo revenue.

The Problem With "Most Loved" Sections

The control section was called "OUR MOST LOVED TREATS." It showed individual products with ratings and prices.

Sounds reasonable. Show your best sellers. Let social proof do the work.

But for a brand with dozens of treat types, "most loved" doesn't answer the customer's actual question: "Which treat is right for my dog?"

A Smoked Beef Marrow Bone might be perfect for a power chewer. Terrible for a senior dog with sensitive teeth. The customer doesn't know that. They just see products and freeze.

That's choice paralysis. And it kills conversion.

The Hypothesis

Introducing a need-based product finder on the homepage will make the first choice clear: what type of treat the customer needs. By reducing choice friction we will increase collection and PDP reach, lift add-to-cart and revenue per session, and decrease time-to-first-PDP.

Instead of "here are our products," the approach becomes "here's how to find the right product for you."

Test Setup

Page: Homepage
Location: Second Fold
Platform: Intelligems
Test Type: A/B/n with 5 variations

Control

"OUR MOST LOVED TREATS" section. Individual product cards showing Smoked Beef Marrow Bone, Uncle Justy's Just Chicken, etc. Star ratings, prices, "Quick Shop" buttons.

Product-first approach. No segmentation by need.

Variation 1

"TREATS FOR EVERY PUP" with need-based categories:

• Powerful Chewers: "For dogs that need a serious chew and cleaner teeth."
• Picky Eaters: "Mouth-watering jerky they can't refuse + toppers for kibble."
• Sensitive Stomachs: "Gentle, single-ingredient options that are easy to digest."
• Training Rewards: "High-value, bite-size rewards that keep focus high."

Each category with a "Shop Now" link below "OUR MOST LOVED TREATS" section.

Variation 2

Same as Variation 1 but with more prominent orange "Shop Now" buttons instead of text links.

Variation 3 (Winner)

Same need-based categories as Variations 1, but positioned right below the banner and above "OUR MOST LOVED TREATS" (higher up the page than Variations 1 and 2).

Variation 4

Combination approach. "OUR MOST LOVED TREATS" product section in a carousel format for more vertical space, then "TREATS FOR EVERY PUP" category finder below it.

Tried to get both. Didn't beat the pure category approach.

Results

Winner: Variation 3 (Need-Based Finder with Lifestyle Imagery)

Metric	Improvement
Monthly Revenue	+$17,813

The pure category-first approach beat both the product-first control and the hybrid variation.

Why It Worked

1. Answers the real question first

Customers don't land on a dog treats site thinking "I want the Smoked Beef Marrow Bone."

They're thinking "My dog is a power chewer and destroys everything" or "My dog has a sensitive stomach and I need something gentle."

The need-based finder speaks to their actual mental state. It meets them where they are.

2. Reduces cognitive load

Four categories is easier to process than a grid of products.

The customer only has to answer one question: "What kind of dog do I have?" Then the site does the filtering for them.

Less thinking. Faster path to the right product.

3. The hybrid approach underperformed

Variation 4 tried to have it both ways: products first, then categories.

It didn't win. Why? Probably because it led with choice overload before offering the solution. The category finder works best when it's the first thing you see, not an afterthought.

What This Means for Product Discovery

If you sell multiple products for different use cases, don't dump them all on the homepage and hope for the best.

Guide the customer. Segment by need.

Things to test:

• Need-based categories: Group products by problem they solve, not product type
• Quiz-style finders: "Find your perfect [product]" interactive tools
• Persona-based navigation: "For beginners," "For pros," "For sensitive skin," etc.
• Use case sections: "For daily use," "For special occasions," "For gifting"

The pattern is the same: help customers self-select into the right bucket before showing products.

FAQ

Won't this add friction by making people click more?

It removes friction, not adds it.

The click to a category page is intentional and confident. The customer knows why they're clicking. Compare that to scrolling through products with no clear direction.

Purposeful clicks convert better than aimless browsing.

What if customers don't fit neatly into categories?

Most will. And for those who don't, you can add a "View All" option or keep a bestseller section lower on the page.

The goal isn't to force everyone into a box. It's to help the majority find their path faster.

How do you decide which need-based categories to use?

Look at your customer support questions. Your reviews. Your post-purchase survey responses.

Customers tell you how they think about your products. Use their language, not yours.

Does this work for single-product brands?

Not really. This pattern is for brands with multiple SKUs serving different needs.

If you sell one product, focus on communicating its value clearly rather than segmenting navigation.

This test was run using Intelligems as part of a CONVERTIBLES personalization program. Want to see what product discovery optimizations could do for your store? Book a call to get 3 personalized recommendations for your store.