Project overview
Six phases, one clear path.
From a blank page to a tested, iterated high-fidelity prototype — every decision in this project traces back to something a real user said.
Credit scores matter yet nobody explains them.
Credit is one of the most consequential financial tools in a young adult's life. Yet the systems built to help people understand and improve their scores are failing them entirely.
Problem statement
"Young adults ages 18–30 understand that their credit score matters, but lack the knowledge, tools, and emotional safety to meaningfully improve it — leading to financial anxiety, avoidance, and missed opportunities that compound over time."
What four people told me that changed everything.
I conducted 4 in-depth user interviews plus competitive analysis and secondary research. Every design decision in this project traces back to a specific finding.
Pain point 02
Jargon creates a wall between users and action
Terms like "derogatory mark," "utilization," and "hard inquiry" stopped participants cold. Even research-heavy users had gaps that jargon-heavy UIs never closed.
P
"What is a 'derogatory mark'? I had to leave the app to search for it."
Priya, 22
Graduate student
Pain point 04
Trust through transparency, not sales
Every participant mentioned distrust of current apps. They want an app that's visibly working for them — no sponsored recommendations, clear data sourcing.
T
"Credit Karma is basically a marketplace with a credit score feature attached."
Tyler, 31
University professor
Dominating theme
"A sense of operating blind in a high-stakes game. Users know credit matters enormously, try to do the right things, but feel like the rules are opaque and the feedback is useless."
Structure, then surface.
Three design principles guided every decision from information architecture through visual design. When choices conflicted, the higher principle won.
Principle 01
Encouraging, not alarming
Gold score color, not red. Arc gauge, not a raw number. Serif quote on score reveal. Every element evaluated for emotional impact first.
Testing broke things, that was the point.
4 participants. 6 tasks. 9 findings. The process of watching real people use the prototype revealed design decisions that looked right on screen but failed in practice.
What testing validated
The score alert causal chain (100% comprehension) · Cyan score color (all 5 participants noted it felt non-alarming) · 3-step action plan limit ("actually a relief") · Material Design aesthetic ("feels fun, not like an intimidating bank app")
Key 01
Before
Score Simulator accessible only via a subtle card below the fold. 3 of 5 users could not find it. Task completion: 60%.
After
Promoted to dedicated "Simulate" tab in bottom navigation. Added "What if I..." entry point on Factor Detail screen. Expected completion: 90%+.
Key 02
Before
Gold glossary pills had no interaction signal. 4 of 5 users assumed they were decorative highlights — never tapped them.
After
Added ↗ icon, underline, and "Tap terms to define" micro-label. Visible press state. The feature is highly valued — making it discoverable unlocks its full value.
Key 03
Before
Score range card positioned below the gauge and headline. Anxious users who fixated on the number never scrolled far enough to see it.
After
Range card moved directly below the gauge, before the headline. Context before emotion — users with lower scores now see their position immediately.
What I learned.
Six phases taught me things about design practice that I could not have learned any other way.
Constraints are features
The 3-step action plan limit — enforced at the architectural level — was the most validated decision in the entire project. Tyler called it "actually a relief." Designing boundaries into the structure itself is more powerful than copy that says "we keep things simple."
Emotion is a design material
Gold score color instead of red wasn't a stylistic preference — it was a response to research showing that users experience real shame and anxiety when checking their scores. Every color, layout, and copy decision carries emotional weight. Treating emotion as a design input changed how I evaluated every screen.
Affordance is invisible until it's missing
The glossary pill finding was humbling. A feature I considered visually distinctive — gold pills — was functionally invisible to 4 of 5 users. Good affordance doesn't just look interactive; it communicates interaction through shape, label, and consistent pattern. A feature nobody uses might as well not exist.
Have questions?
Always happy to connect.