Sorting and filtering: engagement feature or complexity tax?

Sortable columns feel like a natural upgrade. The data on whether visitors use them is mixed.

What usually happens:
— a small share of visitors sort, usually by price;
— filters get used mostly on tables with more than fifteen rows;
— every interactive control adds a chance for the table to break on some device.

When sorting earns its place:
— large, data-heavy comparisons where the visitor's priority genuinely differs (price-sensitive vs. feature-hungry);
— pages where the visitor comes back, as on a deals directory.

When it does not:
— tables with five rows. Your editorial order should already be the best order;
— when the sort changes the position of the highlighted row and breaks the layout.

If you add sorting, keep the default order editorial, make the sorted state obvious, and give a "reset" control. If you add filters, show the count of matching rows so the visitor never lands on an empty table.

Simplest option that often wins: two preset views, "Best overall" and "Cheapest first", as buttons above the table.