Deep dive: sticky CTA bar vs static repeated CTAs on mobile

Deep dive: sticky CTA bar vs static repeated CTAs on mobile

On mobile, where the fold is tiny and scroll is the whole experience, the CTA-placement question gets sharper. Sticky bar or repeated inline buttons?

What the research shows: mobile case studies report sticky CTAs lifting tap-through, because the action is always one thumb-reach away — and thumb-reach matters; usability research on one-handed mobile use shows the bottom-center zone is the easiest to hit and the top corners the hardest. But sticky bars also eat scarce vertical space (a persistent 60px bar is a real chunk of a 667px screen) and, done wrong, cover content or trigger over an open keyboard.

The mechanism is reach cost versus screen cost. A sticky bottom bar minimizes the effort to act at any scroll depth — low reach cost — but pays a constant screen-real-estate tax. Repeated inline CTAs cost nothing persistent and arrive at conviction moments, but the visitor must already be looking at one to act on impulse.

Practical implication for affiliate landers: for a single dominant action (one offer, one button), a sticky bottom bar in the thumb zone usually wins on mobile — keep it short, one CTA, and ensure it hides when a form field is focused so it never sits over the keyboard. For content-heavy or multi-offer pages, repeated inline CTAs at each conviction point avoid the screen tax and the 'which button do I trust' confusion. Don't run both; a sticky bar plus inline buttons creates two competing asks in the same thumb's path.

TL;DR:
— Sticky bottom bars cut reach cost (thumb zone) but tax scarce mobile screen space constantly
— Best for a single dominant action; hide the bar when a keyboard is open
— Content-heavy or multi-offer pages do better with repeated inline CTAs; don't stack both