Score your pricing page against 12 proven best practices used by top SaaS companies. Get a letter grade and actionable recommendations to boost conversions.
0 of 12 answered
Study these SaaS pricing pages to see best practices in action. Tools like MediaFast can help you drive the right audience to a well-optimized pricing page.
Clean layout, transparent per-transaction pricing, clear CTAs, and strong social proof with customer logos. Stripe keeps it simple with usage-based pricing that scales.
Free tier that hooks users, highlighted Team plan, annual toggle with savings badge, feature comparison table with checkmarks, and a clean minimal design.
Three clear tiers (Hobby, Pro, Enterprise), generous free tier, highlighted Pro plan, feature comparison with checkmarks, and FAQ section addressing common questions.
Minimal and bold design, free tier for small teams, highlighted Standard plan, annual savings shown, and strong social proof with recognizable company logos.
Your pricing page is often the last stop before a visitor becomes a customer. It carries more conversion weight than any other page on your site. Even small changes, like adding a guarantee badge or highlighting a recommended plan, can lift revenue by double digits. Once your page is optimized, the next step is driving qualified traffic to it. Many SaaS founders use MediaFast to attract potential customers from Reddit, where real buying conversations happen every day.
This is the same structure the tool above scores against, written out in full so you can audit your page manually, brief a designer, or double check a result. Work through it top to bottom, since the order roughly follows how a first time visitor actually reads a pricing page.
Is there a clearly higher priced tier, even one most people will not buy, that makes the middle tier look reasonable by comparison? If every tier is priced close together, you have no anchor and every plan looks equally forgettable.
Does one tier exist mainly to make another tier look like the obvious choice, for example a print-only style option priced the same as a bundle? If removing a tier would not change anyone's decision, ask whether it is doing its job as a decoy or just adding clutter.
Are there 3 or 4 tiers, not 5 or more? Every additional tier adds a decision the buyer has to make before they can say yes. If you have more than 4, look for tiers that could be collapsed or moved to a custom quote.
Does every tier have its own specific, action oriented button, such as Start Free Trial or Talk to Sales, instead of a generic Learn More that gives the visitor no idea what happens next?
Can visitors switch between monthly and annual pricing, and is the savings from annual billing stated plainly next to the toggle, rather than buried in a footnote?
Is there a logo strip, testimonial, or review score positioned close to the pricing table or the CTA, where purchase hesitation is highest, rather than only on a separate testimonials page?
When a feature is locked behind a higher tier, is that obvious at a glance, using a lock icon, greyed out row, or an upgrade prompt, instead of the feature simply not being mentioned at all?
Can a visitor see an actual number, or at least a realistic range, for at least your entry and middle tiers? A page where every tier says Contact Us pushes serious buyers straight to a competitor who is willing to show a number.
Is a refund policy, guarantee, or free trial stated near the CTA, so the buyer's downside risk is addressed at the exact moment they are deciding, not three clicks away on a legal page?
Is one plan visually distinct with a border, badge, or background color, so a first time visitor can tell in under 2 seconds which plan you want most people to pick?
On a phone screen, do the tiers stack in a readable order with the recommended plan still visible without excessive horizontal scrolling, and are feature comparison tables usable rather than tiny and cramped?
Does a FAQ section near the pricing table answer the objections that actually block a purchase, such as what happens after a trial ends, whether you can change plans, and how refunds work?
These are established, named effects with real research behind them, not marketing folklore. Understanding the mechanism matters more than copying a tactic, since misapplying one, like using an anchor when you actually needed a decoy, can push buyers toward your wrong tier.
Nielsen Norman Group describes anchoring as a first piece of information, like a price, that sticks in the visitor's mind and shapes how everything shown afterward is judged. On a pricing page, listing a high priced tier first, or displaying a full undiscounted price crossed out next to a lower one, sets the reference point that makes the next number feel more reasonable.
Also called asymmetric dominance. In Dan Ariely's well known Economist subscription study, adding a print only tier priced the same as a print plus web bundle, an option almost nobody wanted on its own, made the bundle look obviously superior and shifted the class's preference toward it. Remove the unwanted decoy tier and preferences swing back. The lesson for a pricing page is that a tier does not have to sell well to be doing real work, it can exist purely to make a neighboring tier look better.
Research on the center stage effect finds that people carry a metacognitive belief that whatever sits in the visual middle of a lineup is the most popular or highest quality option, a bias that shows up across consumer choices, not just pricing. That is the actual mechanism behind highlighting your recommended tier in the middle column rather than on either end, it is tapping a real, studied preference for center positioned options.
A Journal of Consumer Research study by Thomas and Morwitz found that the perceived drop in price from something like $30.00 to $29.99 feels larger than the actual one cent difference, because attention anchors on the leftmost digit, which changes from 3 to 2. The effect is strongest when the leftmost digits actually differ, so ending a price at $29 does more perceptual work than ending it at $29.50. It is a real, replicated cognitive bias, not a guarantee that every price ending in 9 will outperform a round number for every audience.
HubSpot's pricing page research and Figma's pricing page guide both point to the same idea: the name of a tier should tell the buyer who it is for, not just how much it costs. Here is when each common pattern actually fits.
| Pattern | Example names | Best fit | Watch out for |
|---|---|---|---|
| Free / Pro / Business / Enterprise | Free, Pro, Business, Enterprise | Broad markets that span solo users through large companies, where the buyer wants an obvious functional ladder. | Business and Enterprise can blur together if the contract terms, seats, or support level are not clearly different. |
| Starter / Growth / Scale | Starter, Growth, Scale | Product led SaaS where customers self identify by company stage rather than by role or feature depth. | Implies growth is guaranteed by upgrading, which can read as overpromising if the product itself does not drive growth. |
| Basic / Plus / Premium | Basic, Plus, Premium | Consumer or prosumer tools where buyers compare feature depth more than company size or seats. | Basic can feel like the plan you are discouraged from choosing if it is styled too plainly next to the others. |
| Persona based naming | Freelancer, Team, Company | When the buyer's actual role, not their company size, is the real segmentation variable driving the purchase. | Only works if the persona names actually match how your real customers think of themselves, or buyers self select the wrong tier. |
| Numbered or lettered tiers | Tier 1, Tier 2, Tier 3 | Enterprise or usage heavy products where pricing is negotiated live and the page exists mainly to start a conversation. | Gives self serve buyers no emotional cue at all, generally the weakest option for a page meant to convert on its own. |
These are fictional companies built to illustrate the checklist above in practice, not real pricing pages or real companies. The numbers are plausible placeholders, not actual data.
Illustrative example, not a real company: DataFlow, a fictional B2B analytics tool
Weak layout
Five tiers with no plan highlighted. The top two tiers both say Contact Us with no visible number. Every button says Learn More regardless of tier.
Improved layout
Consolidated to three tiers, illustrative pricing of $29, $79, and a custom quote. The middle Growth tier is highlighted, and only the genuinely negotiated enterprise tier keeps a Talk to Sales button, since usage there is actually variable.
Illustrative example, not a real company: NoteStack, a fictional note taking SaaS
Weak layout
Only monthly pricing is shown, with no annual option or toggle. There is no testimonial or logo anywhere near the pricing table, and all three tiers list the exact same features with only the storage limit changing.
Improved layout
An annual and monthly toggle is added with the annual savings stated plainly next to it, a short testimonial sits directly above the CTA buttons, and each tier now leads with the specific outcome it unlocks instead of only a storage number.
Illustrative example, not a real company: PingRoute, a fictional API monitoring tool
Weak layout
The page is entirely a bulleted feature list per tier, with no explanation of what happens when usage grows, and no FAQ section addressing refunds, downgrades, or overage charges.
Improved layout
A short how we grow with you section explains what happens as usage doubles, a money back guarantee badge sits next to the CTA, and a 5 question FAQ addresses billing, refunds, and plan changes directly on the page.
None of these will show up as a single alarming metric. They show up as a slow, hard to diagnose drag on conversion that founders often only notice once they finally rebuild the page.
Hiding every price behind Contact Sales, even on your cheapest tier, which pushes price sensitive buyers straight to a competitor who is willing to show a number.
Cramming 5 or more tiers onto one page, which forces the visitor to do comparison work you should have already done for them.
Naming tiers with no clear logic, so buyers cannot tell why Growth costs more than Starter beyond a vague sense that it should.
Making feature gating invisible, so a visitor assumes a feature is included, hits a wall after signing up, and blames your product instead of your pricing page.
Skipping the annual and monthly toggle entirely, which removes an easy anchor that makes the monthly price look more reasonable.
Publishing a pricing page with no FAQ section, leaving billing, refund, and plan change questions to be resolved in a support ticket instead of on the page.
Listing every feature as a bullet point instead of explaining the outcome it produces, a pattern founders discussing pricing pages on r/SaaS specifically call out as common.
Redesigning pricing once every year or two instead of testing specific elements, like CTA copy or plan names, on an ongoing basis.
-> Show a real number or a realistic range for at least your entry and middle tiers
-> Highlight exactly one recommended plan, ideally in the middle position
-> Put social proof close to the CTA, not on a separate page
-> Explain what happens when usage grows past the current tier
-> Keep tier count at 3 or 4
-> Add a FAQ section that answers billing and refund objections directly
-> Hide every price behind a Contact Us form
-> Style every tier identically, so no plan reads as the recommended one
-> List only feature names with no outcome or benefit attached
-> Leave feature gating invisible until after signup
-> Skip the annual and monthly toggle entirely
-> Redesign pricing once every year or two instead of testing it continuously
Most pricing page checklists are written from a designer's or analyst's point of view. It is worth reading what founders themselves flag when they compare pricing pages in public.
In a widely discussed r/SaaS thread reviewing B2B pricing pages, the original poster called out patterns that line up closely with the checklist above: pricing tables that list features instead of outcomes, Contact Sales used as a default even in categories where a price range would build more trust, and expansion paths, what happens when usage or seats grow, that are left vague enough to make finance teams nervous before they sign.
The thread also pointed out that most teams treat a pricing page redesign as a once every 12 to 18 month event rather than something to test on an ongoing basis the way a landing page would be tested. That gap, structured experimentation on the pricing page itself rather than a single annual overhaul, is the same gap this checklist is built to help you close.
A higher priced option, sometimes rarely purchased, whose main job is to make another tier look reasonably priced by comparison.
Also called asymmetric dominance. Adding a third option that is clearly worse than one existing option shifts preference toward that option, even though the original two choices did not change.
Ending a price just below a round number, such as $29 instead of $30, so it is read and processed as noticeably cheaper than the round number one unit higher.
The tendency for people to assume the item placed in the visual middle of a lineup is the most popular or best regarded option, independent of whether that is actually true.
Restricting specific features to higher pricing tiers, shown to the buyer through locks, greyed out rows, or explicit upgrade prompts.
Average revenue per user or account. A pricing page change that shifts which tier most buyers pick will move this number up or down.
A well scored pricing page still needs the rest of the funnel to hold up. Once your tiers, naming, and CTAs are in order, run your landing page itself through the Landing Page Roaster to catch the messaging problems that happen before a visitor ever reaches your pricing table, and check your unit economics with the SaaS Metrics Calculator so a pricing change actually moves the numbers you care about.
A great pricing page only matters if the right people actually reach it. Many SaaS founders use MediaFast to drive qualified visitors from Reddit, where buying conversations for tools like yours are already happening, straight to the page you just optimized.
Common questions about optimizing your pricing page for conversions.
The analyzer evaluates your pricing page against 12 research backed best practices used by top performing SaaS companies. You answer yes or no for each criterion, and the tool calculates a weighted score out of 100 with a letter grade and specific improvement recommendations.
A score of 80 or above (A grade) means your pricing page follows most best practices and is well optimized for conversions. Scores between 60 and 79 (B grade) indicate room for improvement. Below 60 suggests significant opportunities to increase conversion rates by implementing missing elements.
Too many options create decision paralysis. Most high converting pricing pages stick to 3 or 4 tiers, since fewer risks failing to serve distinct buyer segments while more can overwhelm buyers who are trying to compare options. A tight tier count also makes it easier to anchor with a higher priced option and highlight one recommended middle tier.
Yes. Showing annual pricing first anchors visitors to a lower monthly rate, making the offer feel more affordable. It also encourages longer commitments, which improves your LTV and reduces churn. Most successful SaaS companies default to annual pricing with a visible savings badge next to a monthly toggle.
Treat it like a landing page rather than a one time project. Review it quarterly at minimum and run structured tests on specific elements like CTA copy, plan names, feature lists, and price points, rather than waiting for one full redesign every 12 to 18 months.
Match the name to how your buyers actually segment themselves. Functional names like Free, Pro, and Enterprise work when your market spans individuals through large companies. Growth stage names like Starter, Growth, and Scale work well for product led SaaS where customers self identify by company stage. See the tier naming reference table below for more patterns.
The underlying mechanism, known as the left digit effect, is a well studied piece of price cognition research and has not been disproven. It is not a guaranteed conversion lift for every SaaS page, but ending a price just below a round number is still a reasonable default unless your brand positioning specifically calls for clean, round numbers, which is common at the premium end of a market.
A great pricing page only works if the right people find it. MediaFast helps you reach high-intent buyers on Reddit, the platform where SaaS decisions actually get made.
