4 min read

Bayesian Statistics in A/B Testing for More Accurate Growth Decisions

Bayesian Statistics in A/B Testing for More Accurate Growth Decisions

A/B testing has become an indispensable tool for data-driven decision-making. However, the traditional frequentist approach to A/B testing has limitations that can lead to suboptimal decisions, especially in the fast-paced world of growth marketing. Enter Bayesian statistics – a powerful alternative that offers more nuanced, flexible, and actionable insights. This article delves deep into the implementation of Bayesian statistics in A/B testing, providing expert marketers with the knowledge to make more accurate growth decisions.

The Limitations of Frequentist A/B Testing

Before we dive into Bayesian methods, let's briefly recap the limitations of traditional frequentist A/B testing:

  1. Fixed sample sizes: Frequentist tests often require predefined sample sizes, which can be inefficient in dynamic marketing environments.
  2. Binary outcomes: Traditional tests typically provide a "significant" or "not significant" result, lacking nuance.
  3. Misinterpretation of p-values: P-values are often misunderstood, leading to poor decision-making.
  4. Inability to incorporate prior knowledge: Frequentist methods don't allow for the integration of historical data or expert intuition.

New call-to-action

The Bayesian Advantage

Bayesian A/B testing addresses these limitations by:

  1. Allowing for flexible sample sizes: Tests can be stopped or continued as needed without compromising statistical validity.
  2. Providing probability distributions: Instead of binary outcomes, Bayesian methods offer probability distributions of possible effects.
  3. Incorporating prior knowledge: Historical data and expert intuition can be formally integrated into the analysis.
  4. Offering more intuitive interpretations: Results are expressed as probabilities of an effect, which are easier to understand and act upon.

Implementing Bayesian A/B Testing: A Step-by-Step Guide

Let's walk through it.

Step 1: Define Your Metrics and Hypotheses

First, clearly define your key performance indicators (KPIs) and formulate your hypotheses. For example:

  • KPI: Conversion Rate
  • Null Hypothesis (H0): The new design (B) has no effect on the conversion rate compared to the current design (A).
  • Alternative Hypothesis (H1): The new design (B) increases the conversion rate compared to the current design (A).

Step 2: Specify Prior Distributions

One of the key advantages of Bayesian methods is the ability to incorporate prior knowledge. This is done through specifying prior distributions for your parameters of interest. For conversion rates, a Beta distribution is often used due to its properties and conjugacy with the Binomial distribution.

Example: Let's say your historical data shows that your conversion rate typically ranges between 2% and 5%. You might specify a Beta(10, 290) as your prior, which has a mean of 3.33% and a 95% credible interval of [1.6%, 5.7%].

 
from scipy.stats import beta

# Define prior
alpha_prior = 10
beta_prior = 290

# Plot prior distribution
x = np.linspace(0, 0.1, 1000)
plt.plot(x, beta.pdf(x, alpha_prior, beta_prior))
plt.title("Prior Distribution for Conversion Rate")
plt.xlabel("Conversion Rate")
plt.ylabel("Density")
plt.show()
 

Step 3: Collect Data

Run your A/B test and collect data. Let's say after running the test for a week, you have:

  • Control (A): 100 conversions out of 3000 visitors
  • Variant (B): 120 conversions out of 3000 visitors

Step 4: Update with Observed Data

Now, use Bayes' theorem to update your prior beliefs with the observed data. The posterior distribution for each variant will be:

  • Posterior_A = Beta(α_prior + conversions_A, β_prior + visitors_A - conversions_A)
  • Posterior_B = Beta(α_prior + conversions_B, β_prior + visitors_B - conversions_B)
# Update posteriors
alpha_posterior_A = alpha_prior + 100
beta_posterior_A = beta_prior + 3000 - 100

alpha_posterior_B = alpha_prior + 120
beta_posterior_B = beta_prior + 3000 - 120

# Plot posterior distributions
plt.plot(x, beta.pdf(x, alpha_posterior_A, beta_posterior_A), label='A')
plt.plot(x, beta.pdf(x, alpha_posterior_B, beta_posterior_B), label='B')
plt.title("Posterior Distributions for Conversion Rates")
plt.xlabel("Conversion Rate")
plt.ylabel("Density")
plt.legend()
plt.show()
 

Step 5: Analyze Results

With Bayesian methods, we can answer questions like:

  1. What's the probability that B is better than A?
  2. What's the expected lift of B over A?
  3. What's the 95% credible interval for the difference between B and A?
# Probability that B is better than A
samples_A = beta.rvs(alpha_posterior_A, beta_posterior_A, size=100000)
samples_B = beta.rvs(alpha_posterior_B, beta_posterior_B, size=100000)
prob_B_better = np.mean(samples_B > samples_A)

print(f"Probability that B is better than A: {prob_B_better:.2%}")

# Expected lift
expected_lift = np.mean(samples_B) / np.mean(samples_A) - 1
print(f"Expected lift of B over A: {expected_lift:.2%}")

# 95% credible interval for the difference
diff_samples = samples_B - samples_A
credible_interval = np.percentile(diff_samples, [2.5, 97.5])
print(f"95% credible interval for difference: [{credible_interval[0]:.4f}, {credible_interval[1]:.4f}]")
 

Step 6: Make Decisions

Based on these results, you can make more informed decisions. For example:

  • If the probability that B is better than A is 95% or higher, you might decide to implement B.
  • If the expected lift is substantial (e.g., >5%) but the probability is only 80%, you might decide to continue the test to gather more data.
  • If the 95% credible interval includes 0 but is skewed positive, you might decide to implement B if the cost of implementation is low.

Advanced Considerations

Let's go a little deeper.

Multi-Armed Bandits

Bayesian methods naturally extend to multi-armed bandit algorithms, which can dynamically allocate traffic to better-performing variants during the test. This can be particularly valuable for short-lived campaigns or when opportunity costs are high.

Example implementation using Thompson Sampling:

import numpy as np
from scipy.stats import beta

def thompson_sampling(alpha_A, beta_A, alpha_B, beta_B):
sample_A = beta.rvs(alpha_A, beta_A)
sample_B = beta.rvs(alpha_B, beta_B)
return 'A' if sample_A > sample_B else 'B'

# Simulate 10000 visitors
for _ in range(10000):
chosen_variant = thompson_sampling(alpha_posterior_A, beta_posterior_A,
alpha_posterior_B, beta_posterior_B)

# Simulate conversion (you'd replace this with actual data in a real scenario)
converted = np.random.random() < (0.033 if chosen_variant == 'A' else 0.04)

# Update posteriors
if chosen_variant == 'A':
alpha_posterior_A += converted
beta_posterior_A += 1 - converted
else:
alpha_posterior_B += converted
beta_posterior_B += 1 - converted

# Final results
print(f"A: Beta({alpha_posterior_A}, {beta_posterior_A})")
print(f"B: Beta({alpha_posterior_B}, {beta_posterior_B})")
 

Hierarchical Models

For businesses running multiple related tests (e.g., across different geographic regions), hierarchical Bayesian models can pool information across tests, leading to more accurate estimates, especially for segments with limited data.

Example using PyMC3:

import pymc3 as pm

# Assume we have data from 5 regions
conversions_A = [95, 80, 100, 90, 110]
visitors_A = [3000, 2500, 3100, 2800, 3200]
conversions_B = [110, 95, 120, 105, 130]
visitors_B = [3000, 2500, 3100, 2800, 3200]

with pm.Model() as hierarchical_model:
# Hyperpriors
mu_alpha = pm.Normal('mu_alpha', mu=0, sd=1)
sigma_alpha = pm.HalfNormal('sigma_alpha', sd=1)

# Region-specific effects
alpha = pm.Normal('alpha', mu=mu_alpha, sd=sigma_alpha, shape=5)

# Treatment effect
beta = pm.Normal('beta', mu=0, sd=1)

# Conversion rates
theta_A = pm.Deterministic('theta_A', pm.math.invlogit(alpha))
theta_B = pm.Deterministic('theta_B', pm.math.invlogit(alpha + beta))

# Likelihood
y_A = pm.Binomial('y_A', n=visitors_A, p=theta_A, observed=conversions_A)
y_B = pm.Binomial('y_B', n=visitors_B, p=theta_B, observed=conversions_B)

# Inference
trace = pm.sample(2000, tune=1000)

# Analyze results
pm.plot_posterior(trace, var_names=['beta'])
 

Bayesian Stats for A/B Tests

Implementing Bayesian statistics in A/B testing offers a more nuanced, flexible, and powerful approach to making growth decisions. By incorporating prior knowledge, providing probabilistic outcomes, and allowing for more intuitive interpretation of results, Bayesian methods enable marketers to make better-informed decisions in dynamic environments.

As you implement these methods, remember:

  1. Clearly define your metrics and hypotheses.
  2. Thoughtfully specify your priors based on historical data and expert knowledge.
  3. Continuously update your beliefs as new data comes in.
  4. Make decisions based on probabilities and expected values, not just point estimates.
  5. Consider advanced techniques like multi-armed bandits and hierarchical models for more complex scenarios.

By mastering Bayesian A/B testing, you'll be equipped to navigate the complexities of modern growth marketing with greater precision and confidence.

Using Machine Learning for Dynamic Micro-Segmentation

Using Machine Learning for Dynamic Micro-Segmentation

Traditional customer segmentation methods are no longer sufficient to capture the nuances of customer behavior and preferences. Enter dynamic...

Read More
Advanced Attribution Modeling: Moving Beyond Last-Click with Markov Chains

Advanced Attribution Modeling: Moving Beyond Last-Click with Markov Chains

Look, I get it – you're still using last-click attribution because it's about as comfortable as that ratty college sweatshirt you refuse to throw...

Read More
B2B Content Marketing Report: 2 Examples

B2B Content Marketing Report: 2 Examples

Want to boost your B2B content marketing? We've got you covered! Get two real-life marketing report examples from Company A and Company B for January...

Read More