← Back to work
UX / UI · Product Design  /  Fintech web app

Pocket Transfer

A comparison tool that reads live exchange rates, fees, and promos across every major provider at once, then ranks them by what your recipient actually receives. No math, no guesswork, no overpaying.

Role  Lead UX Designer Duration  Jun 2026 – Aug 2026 Output  End-to-end product, from research to shipped build
UX Research Interaction Design Prototyping Fintech
Read case study
Pocket Transfer product hero
Project overview
The problem

The real cost hides
across a dozen tabs

Sending money abroad means opening provider after provider and decoding hidden fees and marked-up exchange rates just to estimate what a transfer really costs. Comparison is so tedious that most people give up and quietly overpay, every single month.

The goal

One honest number
per provider

Collapse a messy, multi-tab comparison into a single screen that ranks providers by what the recipient actually receives. Choosing the cheapest, fastest option should take seconds, not half an hour.

The product

Pocket Transfer aggregates live quotes and reduces each option to a single "recipient gets" amount that already folds in rate markup, fees, and promotions. It's built for the people who feel this most: international students, travellers, and anyone sending money home.

High-fidelity homepage in motion — the shipped compare view running in an iMac mockup.
Pocket Transfer high-fidelity homepage — mobile
Mobile view. The same compare experience, responsive down to the phone. Click to enlarge.
Pocket Transfer high-fidelity homepage — full page
High-fidelity homepage (desktop). The shipped compare view, with providers ranked by amount received. Click to enlarge.
Pocket Transfer compare providers page — full page
Compare providers (desktop). Side-by-side shortlist above the full ranked list, with sort and delivery-method filters. Click to enlarge.
Understanding the user
User research · summary

I assumed rate was
everything. It wasn't.

I ran remote interviews and surveys with 12 people who send money abroad at least once a month. I went in certain the exchange rate was what mattered. It wasn't. What people actually wrestled with was total cost, the tangle of rate markup, fees, and promotions spread across a dozen sites, and they flatly distrusted "zero fee" marketing. That single insight reframed the product around one honest "recipient gets" number per provider.

Pain points
1
Hidden costs
Fees and rate markups sit buried across provider sites, so the true cost never surfaces. Response: lead every card with one all-inclusive "recipient gets" amount.
2
Manual comparison
Checking five or more providers by hand burns 30-plus minutes, and quotes expire before you finish. Response: aggregate live quotes into a single, always-current view.
3
Missed promotions
Coupons and first-transfer deals scatter across sites and lapse unnoticed. Response: surface valid promos and apply them to each quote automatically.
4
Low trust
People doubt "zero fee" marketing and stall on providers they don't recognize. Response: pair every quote with a full cost breakdown, ratings, and a delivery estimate.
Persona · Amara
Portrait of Amara, a registered nurse
Amara, 34Registered nurse

"I just want to know which service gets the most money to my family, without doing math across five different websites."

Goals

  • Send money home monthly without overpaying in fees
  • Know exactly what her family receives
  • Finish the whole task in minutes

Frustrations

  • Hidden fees and marked-up rates
  • Comparing providers one by one
  • Promo codes that never seem to work
  • "Zero fee" claims she can't verify
Age
34
Education
BSc Nursing
Hometown
Lagos, Nigeria
Family
Parents & two siblings back home
Occupation
Nurse in Houston, TX
User journey map

Mapping Amara's monthly remittance surfaced most of the friction before the transfer even begins: gathering quotes, re-checking rates that keep expiring, and hunting for promo codes. The comparison stage carried the heaviest emotional load, so that's where I focused the design.

StageActionsFeelingOpportunity
1 · Decide to sendChecks family needs, payday timingMotivatedShow live rate for her saved corridor
2 · Gather quotesOpens 5+ provider sites, notes rates and feesFrustratedAggregate live quotes in one view
3 · Compare costsBuilds mental math of rate + fee − promoOverwhelmedOne "recipient gets" number incl. everything
4 · Choose providerSecond-guesses "zero fee" claims, re-checksAnxiousTransparent breakdown + trust signals
5 · Send & confirmCompletes transfer, tells familyRelievedDeep-link handoff with locked-in quote
Starting the design
Sitemap

Flows built around intent

I structured the app around what people came to do. A Compare path with a short quiz and filters (total, lowest rate, lowest fee, fastest, safest) sits at the center, with Deals, Rate alerts, and Account as supporting branches. Every path resolves to one ranked result that deep-links straight to the provider.

Paper wireframes

Six takes on one screen

I sketched six versions of the results screen, testing each against what research said mattered most. The version I carried forward leads with the amount the recipient actually gets and keeps fee, rate, promo, and delivery time visible without a single extra click.

Digital wireframes

Ranked by value received

Providers sort by amount received, so the best overall value always lands first. Each card puts the fee, exchange rate, and applied promo up front, with nothing hidden below the fold.

Low-fidelity prototype

The core path, connected

The prototype wires up the main journey end to end: enter an amount and destination, compare live quotes, review the cost breakdown, and hand off to the chosen provider. No account needed to start comparing.

Screens & process

From six paper explorations of the results screen, to a connected low-fidelity flow, to the high-fidelity build, one principle held: every screen leads with the amount the recipient actually gets and keeps fee, rate, promo, and delivery time in view without extra clicks. Click any screen to enlarge.

Usability study · findings

I ran two rounds of moderated usability testing, five participants each. Round 1 pressure-tested the low-fidelity prototype; round 2 validated the high-fidelity mockups. Each round's findings fed directly into the next iteration.

Round 1 · low-fidelity

  1. Users wanted to see how the total was calculated
  2. Users expected promo codes to apply automatically
  3. Delivery time mattered nearly as much as price

Round 2 · high-fidelity

  1. The comparison view felt crowded; users wanted simpler cards
  2. Users wanted to sort by speed as well as best value
  3. Trust signals like ratings were too hard to find
Going forward
Impact

Pocket Transfer turns cost transparency from a chore into the default. In testing, participants reached a confident choice in a fraction of the time their old routine took.

"I can finally see what a transfer really costs. This would save me money every month."

— Usability study participant

What I learned

Trust is designed, not claimed. Showing the math behind each quote moved people more than any amount of visual polish. And my sharpest early assumption, that rate was everything, didn't survive the first few interviews. Talking to real users early saved me from designing the wrong product.

Next steps
1

Run a third usability study on the live product with real-time provider data to validate quote accuracy and expiry handling.

2

Design rate alerts and a "send again" flow so returning users can act when their corridor's exchange rate peaks.

3

Partner with providers on deep-link handoff so the fees and promos shown in Pocket Transfer are honored at checkout.