Shared research study link

MoneyLion - Personal Finance App Reactions

Explore how American consumers perceive all-in-one personal finance apps and what builds trust

Study Overview Updated Jan 20, 2026

Research question: How US consumers perceive all-in-one personal finance apps and what builds trust-tested against MoneyLion’s advances/credit-building/investing bundle.
Who: 6 US adults (ages 26–42; rural + urban incl. Buffalo NY and SC; varied income/tech literacy) provided 18 responses across three prompts.
What they said: Most juggle 6–10 apps and want a single, fast snapshot for cash flow and subscriptions, but they balance that appeal with fears of centralization “blast radius,” flaky connectors/2FA, and a minority that prefers analog firebreaks. Main insights: Trust is earned via operational transparency (one-page, plain-English fees; named FDIC/SIPC custodians), strict product separation and explicit opt-ins, read-only/granular linking with easy revoke, fast human support and status visibility, and a “boring,” legible UI (big balances with cents, clear pending vs cleared, timestamps, manual refresh, fast loads) plus exports and easy exit/purge.
Segment nuances: Some demand passkeys/hardware keys and bug bounties; others prioritize low-bandwidth reliability, Spanish support, and household/joint views with role controls.
Decision takeaways: Build a trust-first, ad-free, read-only aggregator MVP-publish a fees/custody one-pager; ship OAuth/open-banking linking, numbers-first UI, CSV/PDF exports and one-tap close/purge; stand up a public status page and visible phone/weekend support; support key niche portals and shared roles; then prove reliability month-to-month before expanding credit/investing.

Participant Snapshots

Stack all

6 profiles

Danielle Urquidez

Danielle Urquidez, 38, is a married community programs coordinator in suburban Buffalo, NY, with one child. A renter, she walks to work, budgets for a home down payment, cooks, gardens, and prefers durable, transparent, winter-proof value.

Ashley Mcgee

Ashley Mcgee, 38, a married Hispanic mom in Rock Hill, SC, is a commercial lines account manager. Budget-conscious and health-aware after past kidney disease, she values reliability, clear pricing, and family-friendly simplicity, balancing work with school,…

Robert Reyes

Robert Reyes, 40, is a bilingual rural California trucking sales rep, married with two kids. Faith-centered, practical, and relationship-driven, he values reliability, transparent costs, and time-saving solutions that fit fluctuating commissions and rural r…

Clayton Oconnor

26-year-old single father in Tallahassee managing a fast-casual restaurant. Co-parents two kids, rides a scooter, relies on public healthcare, budgets tightly, and optimizes for time, reliability, and kid safety while pursuing promotion.

Deangelo Reed

Deangelo Reed, 28, is a high-earning remote platform engineer in a religious nonprofit, living simply in rural Montana. Pragmatic, privacy-focused, and outdoorsy, he values reliability, open standards, local stewardship, and clear, practical communication.

Richard Womack

Richard Womack is a faith-rooted, frugal 42-year-old in rural Texas. Single, uninsured, not in labor force. Lives simply on family land, tinkers, cooks from scratch, values reliability and community, relies on church and barter, and prefers practical, offli…

Danielle Urquidez

Ashley Mcgee

Robert Reyes

Clayton Oconnor

Deangelo Reed

Richard Womack

Overview 0 participants

Sex / Gender

Race / Ethnicity

Locale (Top)

Occupations (Top)

Demographic Overview No agents selected

Age bucket	Male count	Female count

Participant locations No agents selected

Participant Incomes US benchmark scaled to group size

Income bucket	Participants	US households

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2022 ACS 1-year (Table B19001; >$200k evenly distributed for comparison)

Media Ingestion

Connections appear when personas follow many of the same sources, highlighting overlapping media diets.

Questions and Responses

Stack all

3 questions

Response Summaries

Stack all

3 questions

Word Cloud

Persona Correlations

Overview

Respondents broadly distrust “all‑in‑one” personal finance apps unless those apps signal explicit, auditable limits and human accountability. Trust drivers cluster around transparent, plain‑language fees and custody; predictable, read‑only or granular linking controls; visible human support and rapid remediation; and low‑friction, legible UI that prioritizes clarity over gamification. Segment context strongly colors priorities: rural and low‑income users emphasize offline reliability and cash fallbacks; Spanish‑speakers require Spanish‑language support and culturally familiar documentation; higher‑income and tech‑savvy users want custody naming, cryptographic auth and export/auditability; mid‑career partnered households need clear shared/joint flows and role separation. Design implications: default to conservative data access (view‑only), publish single‑page fee & custody statements, surface fast human contact options, provide CSV/OFX exports and an explicit account‑closure/ purge path, and optimize for low bandwidth/offline snapshots.

Total responses: 18

Key Segments

Segment	Attributes	Insight	Supporting Agents
Mid‑career partnered households (mid‑30s to 40s)	age range mid‑30s to 40s marital status married/partnered primary concerns joint accounts, household roles, savings goals (down payment, childcare)	This group wants shared household views and goal tracking but insists on role clarity and the ability to limit automated nudges or upsells that could interfere with family cash flows. Trust is earned by simple shared controls, explicit pending vs cleared balances, and read‑only defaults for external links.	Danielle Urquidez, Ashley Mcgee, Robert Reyes
Rural / spotty‑connectivity users	locale rural / low connectivity primary concerns weak signal, dependence on cash, need for human phone support	Reliability and low‑tech fallbacks trump feature density. These users expect lightweight apps, offline snapshots/status pages, and explicit fallbacks (cash recovery instructions, phone support). Authentication and UI should account for environmental constraints (cold weather, limited data).	Richard Womack, Deangelo Reed, Robert Reyes
Tech‑savvy, higher‑income professionals	occupation senior/lead technical roles income bracket upper primary concerns security, custody transparency, auditability	Security and provenance matter more than bells and whistles: expect demands for named FDIC/SIPC custody, passkeys/hardware‑key support, OAuth/open‑banking style linking, independent audits, and full data exportability. These users will judge a product by its ability to prove custody and data handling.	Deangelo Reed, Robert Reyes
Low‑income / cash‑first respondents	income bracket low / unstable income financial behavior cash use, informal ledgers, aversion to single point of failure	Perceive all‑in‑one apps as potential single points of systemic failure. To build trust, offer plain fee examples, guarantees around no surprise withdrawals/upsells, offline/analog-friendly exports, and clear fallback procedures when the app is inaccessible.	Richard Womack
Spanish‑language / Hispanic respondents	language Spanish / bilingual cultural needs Spanish support, plain Spanish fee documents, culturally familiar assistance	Language access is a trust hinge. Offer single‑page fee sheets in Spanish, Spanish‑speaking human reps, and Spanish UX copy for critical flows (account linking, dispute resolution) to convert skepticism into usable trust.	Robert Reyes, Danielle Urquidez
Younger hourly / gig workers and parents (mid‑20s to 30s)	age range mid‑20s to 30s occupation hourly, gig, retail, restaurant primary concerns speed, clear available vs pending cash, co‑parenting or shared expense workflows	This group prioritizes speed and clarity: quick snapshot workflows (<2 minutes), clear pending vs available balances, fast refunds/remediation, and simple shared expense tools (split, screenshot receipts). They will try new apps with small amounts but expect plain examples of fees and timelines.	Clayton Oconnor, Ashley Mcgee

Shared Mindsets

Trait	Signal	Agents
Fear of single point of failure / preference for firebreaks	Across income and tech literacy, many users prefer separate systems or analog fallbacks (cash, spreadsheets, shoebox receipts) and want the app to avoid being an irreversible gatekeeper to funds.	Danielle Urquidez, Richard Womack, Ashley Mcgee, Clayton Oconnor, Deangelo Reed
Plain‑English fee transparency	Users expect a single‑page fee table with dollar examples and explicit statements about APRs, advance costs, and any recurring charges; obfuscation or dark patterns quickly erode trust.	Robert Reyes, Richard Womack, Ashley Mcgee, Clayton Oconnor, Danielle Urquidez
Default to conservative linking (read‑only/granular controls)	People prefer view‑only by default, one‑click revoke, and granular permissions for actions. This reduces perceived systemic risk and increases willingness to connect accounts.	Danielle Urquidez, Deangelo Reed, Ashley Mcgee, Clayton Oconnor
Demand for fast, visible human support and remediation	Visible phone/chat support and quick remediation (refunds, postmortems) are major trust accelerants-especially when glitches threaten overdrafts or credit harm.	Robert Reyes, Richard Womack, Ashley Mcgee, Danielle Urquidez, Clayton Oconnor
UI preferences: boring, legible, and fast	Users prefer functional, legible displays (big numbers, clear pending vs cleared, timestamps, manual refresh) and explicitly reject gamification, confetti or aggressive upsells that obscure account status.	Ashley Mcgee, Danielle Urquidez, Clayton Oconnor, Richard Womack, Robert Reyes, Deangelo Reed
Exportability and right‑to‑audit expectation	Many expect CSV/PDF/OFX exports and an easy off‑ramp (close account & purge). Data portability and audit trails are core trust signals, especially for technically literate users.	Danielle Urquidez, Deangelo Reed, Robert Reyes, Ashley Mcgee
Prefer separation between credit/advance and investing	Users want advances/credit products isolated from core cash and investing; investing should be opt‑in and clearly separated to avoid unexpected exposure to market risk.	Ashley Mcgee, Danielle Urquidez, Clayton Oconnor, Deangelo Reed

Divergences

Segment	Contrast	Agents
Tech‑savvy higher‑income vs Rural / low‑connectivity users	Tech‑savvy users prioritize cryptographic auth, named custody, and auditability; rural users prioritize lightweight apps, phone support and offline snapshots. Security sophistication diverges from reliance on human, low‑tech backups.	Deangelo Reed, Robert Reyes, Richard Womack, Deangelo Reed
Higher‑income professionals vs Low‑income / cash‑first respondents	Higher‑income respondents are willing to rely on institutional custody assurances and exports, while cash‑first users view centralized digital accounts as risky single points of failure and favor physical cash/analogue records.	Robert Reyes, Richard Womack
Spanish‑language respondents vs general English‑first users	Spanish‑speaking users treat language access and culturally familiar documentation as non‑negotiable trust cues; for others, language is secondary to UI and fee clarity.	Robert Reyes, Danielle Urquidez
Younger hourly/gig workers vs Mid‑career partnered households	Younger gig workers demand ultra‑fast snapshot workflows and clear pending balances for day‑to‑day cash management; mid‑career households demand joint views, goal tracking and role separation for longer‑term planning.	Clayton Oconnor, Ashley Mcgee, Danielle Urquidez

Recommendations & Next Steps

Overview

Consumers juggle 6–10 apps and want a faster, single snapshot, but trust hinges on limiting the blast radius of centralization. A viable path is a trust‑first, read‑only, ad‑free aggregator that is boring, legible, and reliable. Earn trust with: a one‑page fees & custody explainer, clear product boundaries (no auto‑sweeps; advances/credit/investing strictly opt‑in), visible human support with SLAs, status transparency (uptime, incidents), robust exports and easy exit, open‑banking/OAuth linking, and a UI that prioritizes pending vs cleared, last updated, and immediate traceability. Optimize for low bandwidth, niche/local portals, and shared/household views. Launch via a small‑scope MVP, prove reliability month‑to‑month, then expand.

Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)

#	Action	Why	Owner	Effort	Impact
1	Launch Trust Center + one‑page fees/custody	Users demand plain‑English fees, named partners and how you make money before they’ll try the app.	Compliance + Product	Low	High
2	Add visible sync state and manual refresh	A clear last updated timestamp, connection status, and manual refresh directly reduce anxiety about stale data.	Engineering	Low	High
3	Turn off gamification/upsells in core flows	Confetti, nags and dark patterns erode trust; a quiet, numbers‑first UI is a primary trust signal.	Product + Design	Low	High
4	Expose CSV/PDF export and in‑app account closure	Exportability and a one‑tap close & purge build confidence and reduce lock‑in fears.	Engineering	Med	High
5	Stand up public status page with incident history	Operational transparency (uptime, postmortems) is a repeated trust driver.	SRE/Engineering	Low	Med
6	Make human support obvious (phone + weekend hours)	Fast, reachable humans are table stakes for money issues; reduces churn and complaint escalations.	CX/Support	Med	High

Initiatives (30–90 days)

#	Initiative	Description	Owner	Timeline	Dependencies
1	Read‑only Aggregation via OAuth + Connector Reliability	Implement open‑banking/OAuth connections with granular scopes and one‑click revoke. Add connector health monitoring, robust reconnect flows, and explicit pending vs posted data handling. Support key niche/local portals (credit unions, FSA) and offer manual/CSV imports as fallback.	Engineering + Partnerships	0–90 days MVP; 90–180 days expand coverage	Aggregator vendors (Plaid, MX, Finicity/Akoya), Bank partner OAuth enablement, Legal review of data scopes
2	Trust Center, Privacy & Security Program	Publish one‑page fees with $ examples; name custody partners and protections (FDIC/SIPC where applicable). Ship passkeys/TOTP, device biometrics, data minimization, retention limits, verified delete, bug bounty, and an independent security assessment summary.	Security + Compliance	0–60 days initial; 90–120 days audit/bounty	Counsel review (fees, privacy), Security audit vendor, Bug bounty platform
3	Numbers‑First UI Revamp	Deliver a boring, legible UI: large balances (with cents), clear pending vs cleared vs scheduled, last updated + manual refresh, fast loads (<2s), readable type/high contrast, platform‑native navigation (Android back), and low‑bandwidth optimizations.	Product + Design + Engineering	0–90 days for core views	Design system updates, Performance budget and telemetry, Accessibility review
4	Human Support & Remediation Playbooks	Stand up visible phone line and weekend hours. Define SLAs (first response, resolution), fee reimbursement/credit repair policies for platform errors, escalation paths, and localized (EN/ES) scripts. Integrate chat/voice entry points in primary screens.	CX/Support	0–60 days pilot; 60–120 days scale	Contact center vendor/tooling, Policy/legal sign‑off, Training and QA
5	Data Portability & Easy Exit	Add CSV/OFX/PDF exports across accounts/transactions, a one‑tap close account & purge with confirmation receipts, and a public data dictionary to clarify what’s stored and for how long.	Engineering + Legal	30–90 days	Backend export services, Retention/purge jobs, Legal copy approval
6	Shared/Household Views and Role Controls	Enable shareable dashboards with roles (Owner, Contributor, Viewer), scoped sharing by account/category, simple splits/memos for co‑parenting, and evidence‑friendly outputs (screenshots, PDFs).	Product	90–180 days	Permissions model, Design research with households, Security review

KPIs to Track

#	KPI	Definition	Target	Frequency
1	Connector Health	Successful refresh rate across linked accounts and percent with pending coverage; median refresh time.	>=98% success; >=80% accounts show pending; median refresh <= 15s	Weekly
2	Trust Conversion	New users who connect a second account or enable export within 14 days (proxy for trust).	>=45% within 14 days	Weekly
3	Support Responsiveness	Median first response time and 24‑hour resolution rate for money‑impacting tickets.	First response < 5 min; >=85% resolved < 24h	Weekly
4	Performance & Stability	Cold start time, crash‑free sessions, and API error rate in core dashboard.	Start < 2s p95; crash‑free >=99.8%; API error < 0.5%	Daily
5	Privacy & Security Adoption	Share of OAuth links (vs screen scraping) and 2FA/passkey adoption.	>=70% OAuth; >=80% 2FA/passkeys	Monthly
6	Churn with Dignity	Percent of closures with completed purge + export receipt and post‑closure CSAT.	>=95% purge confirmations; CSAT >=4.3/5	Monthly

Risks & Mitigations

#	Risk	Mitigation	Owner
1	Connector fragility leads to stale data and erodes trust.	Prioritize OAuth connections; multi‑vendor strategy; explicit status + user messaging; manual CSV import fallback; SLA with aggregators.	Engineering + Partnerships
2	Human support costs outweigh early‑stage revenue.	Tiered triage, call‑back model, targeted hours aligned to peak demand, strong self‑serve content, track deflection without sacrificing human access.	CX/Support
3	Perception of predatory bundling (advances + investing) harms brand trust.	Strict product separation, opt‑in only, fee caps with $ examples, no auto‑sweeps, risk language in plain English/Spanish, independent reviews.	Product + Compliance
4	Security additions reduce usability (e.g., hardware keys) causing drop‑off.	Progressive security: default passkeys/TOTP + biometrics; offer hardware keys as an advanced option; measure opt‑in and friction.	Security + Product
5	Low‑bandwidth and niche portal support slips scope/timeline.	Deliver offline snapshot and top 10 niche portals first; publish roadmap of coverage; provide manual import and clear ETAs.	Product + Engineering

Timeline

0–30 days: Quick wins (Trust Center v1, timestamps + manual refresh, status page, upsell off‑switch, CSV/PDF exports v1, support entry points).

30–90 days: Numbers‑first UI, OAuth linking, low‑bandwidth optimizations, support SLAs live, in‑app close & purge, ES/EN fee sheets.

90–180 days: Expand connector coverage (credit unions/FSA), shared/household roles, security audit summary + bug bounty, incident playbooks and public postmortems.

180+ days: Deep reliability (redundant aggregators), advanced permissions, broader localization, and ongoing UX/ops tuning based on KPI deltas.

Research Study Narrative

Objective and Context

We explored how American consumers perceive all‑in‑one personal finance apps and what builds trust, using MoneyLion’s bundle (cash advances up to $500, credit building, and investing) as a reference point. Across interviews, people manage a fragmented stack of 6–10 apps/services and feel real friction from passwords, time, and context‑switching. Many welcomed the speed and clarity of an all‑in‑one dashboard (cash flow, subscriptions), yet almost everyone weighed that upside against the “blast radius” risk of centralization, unreliable bank connectors, and 2FA hassles. As Danielle Urquidez said, “Short answer: too many… about 8 or 9”; while Deangelo Reed cautioned, “One vendor holds the keys and scrapes every transaction history? Hard pass.”

What Builds Trust (Cross‑Question Learnings)

Operational transparency and simple fees: A one‑page, plain‑English fee/APR sheet with dollar examples and no hidden “membership” or “express” upsells was a baseline for trial (Robert Reyes: “One‑page fee sheet I can read in 2 minutes.”).
Service‑level commitments and human recourse: Visible phone number, weekend hours, fast resolution SLAs, and concrete remediation (refunds, reversal timelines) were repeatedly cited (Ashley Mcgee: “Someone who will actually resolve things.”).
Product separation and explicit consent: Clear boundaries between advances, credit‑building, and investing; no auto‑sweeps; investing off by default; explicit, reversible credit reporting consent with examples of tradeline impacts (Clayton Oconnor).
Data privacy, portability, and easy exit: Data minimization, opt‑out of brokering, one‑tap account closure with verified delete, and CSV/OFX/PDF exports reduce lock‑in fears.
Security and custody clarity: Named partner banks/brokers with FDIC/SIPC statements, strong auth (passkeys/TOTP; optional hardware keys), independent audits, a public status page, and postmortems (Deangelo Reed: “Independent audits with summaries, not vibes.”).
“Boring, legible, and fast” UI: Big, accurate balances (with cents), pending vs cleared separation, visible last updated timestamp plus manual refresh, immediate transaction traceability, quick loads (<2s), and clear errors. Users reject gamification, confetti, and aggressive upsells in core flows (Ashley: “Give me the numbers, the dates, and a clean exit.”).

Persona Correlations and Nuances

Mid‑career partnered households: Want shared/joint views, role clarity, and read‑only defaults; insist on explicit pending vs cleared for household cash flow (Danielle, Ashley, Robert).
Rural/spotty‑connectivity and cash‑first users: Prioritize lightweight reliability, offline snapshots, and phone support; maintain analog backups (Richard: “Cash don’t crash.”).
Tech‑savvy, higher‑income: Demand custody naming, passkeys/hardware‑key support, OAuth/open‑banking linking, auditability, and exports (Deangelo, Robert).
Spanish‑language/bilingual: Trust hinges on Spanish fee sheets, Spanish‑speaking support, and ES/EN UX for critical flows (Robert, Danielle).
Younger hourly/gig parents: Need speed, clear “available today,” and fast remediation; simple shared expense tools (Clayton, Ashley).

Recommendations

Publish a Trust Center + one‑page fees & custody (plain English/Spanish), naming partner bank/broker and protections; disclose how MoneyLion makes money.
Ship read‑only aggregation via OAuth with granular scopes, one‑click revoke, connector health monitoring, and explicit handling of pending vs posted; support local credit unions/FSA portals and manual CSV import.
Revamp to a numbers‑first, ad‑free core UI: big balances with cents, pending/cleared/scheduled tabs, last updated + manual refresh, <2s load, high contrast, platform‑native navigation.
Stand up human support and remediation playbooks: visible phone line and weekend hours, SLAs, refund/credit‑repair policies, and integrated support entry points.
Data portability and easy exit: CSV/OFX/PDF exports across views; one‑tap close & purge with confirmation receipts; document retention limits.
Public status page with uptime, incident history, and postmortems.

Risks and Mitigations

Connector fragility → Prioritize OAuth, multi‑vendor strategy, clear status messaging, CSV fallback, aggregator SLAs.
Support cost → Tiered triage/call‑back, align hours to demand, strong self‑serve without removing human access.
Perceived predatory bundling → Strict opt‑in, no auto‑sweeps, fee caps with dollar examples, plain ES/EN risk language, independent reviews.
Security friction → Progressive security: default passkeys/TOTP + biometrics; hardware keys optional; monitor opt‑in and drop‑off.

Next Steps and Measurement

0–30 days: Launch Trust Center (fees/custody), add timestamps + manual refresh, turn off core‑flow upsells, expose CSV/PDF export v1, publish status page, add visible support entry points.
30–90 days: Numbers‑first UI core views, OAuth linking, low‑bandwidth optimizations, support SLAs live, one‑tap close & purge, ES/EN fee sheets.
90–180 days: Expand connector coverage (credit unions/FSA), shared/household roles, audit summary + bug bounty, incident playbooks and public postmortems.

Connector Health: ≥98% successful refresh; ≥80% accounts with pending coverage; median refresh ≤15s (weekly).
Trust Conversion: ≥45% new users connect a second account or enable export within 14 days (weekly).
Support Responsiveness: First response <5 min; ≥85% of money‑impacting tickets resolved <24h (weekly).
Performance & Stability: p95 cold start <2s; crash‑free ≥99.8%; API error <0.5% (daily).
Privacy/Security Adoption: ≥70% OAuth links; ≥80% 2FA/passkey use (monthly).

Recommended Follow-up Questions Updated Jan 20, 2026

Which features of an all-in-one personal finance app are most valuable to you? Please complete a MaxDiff using these items: Unified cash-flow dashboard; Subscription tracking/cancellation; Bill reminders/calendar; Automatic categorization/merchant enrichment; Read-only aggregation with easy revoke; Cash advance up to $500; Credit-building loan/reporting; Investing integration; Joint/household roles and permissions; CSV/PDF export and easy data deletion; Live human phone support; Low-bandwidth/of...

maxdiff Prioritizes roadmap features and trade-offs, indicating which capabilities most drive adoption and trust to focus build resources.
For each account type, what is the highest permission you would be comfortable granting to a finance app? Use the same scale for each: Do not link; Read-only balances only; Read-only balances + transactions; Read/write (move money, pay bills). Account types: Checking; Savings; Credit card; Student/auto/personal loans; Mortgage; Brokerage/investing; Crypto exchange/wallet; Employer payroll/benefits.

matrix Defines default connection scopes and permission architecture by account type, limiting ‘blast radius’ while enabling useful functionality.
Which monetization approaches would you consider acceptable for a personal finance app you trust? Select all that apply: Paid monthly subscription; Free funded by debit card interchange only; Optional paid premium features (free core); In-app advertising; Referral offers with clear disclosure and opt-in; Tips/pay-what-you-want for advances; Per-use fee for instant transfers/advances; Selling aggregated/anonymized data to third parties; Partner revenue sharing on bill negotiation/switching.

multi select Identifies viable revenue models that do not erode trust, guiding pricing and monetization strategy.
How comfortable are you with each of the following data practices if clearly disclosed and controllable? Rate each: Very uncomfortable, Uncomfortable, Neutral, Comfortable, Very comfortable. Practices: Using transaction data to personalize insights; Sharing payment history with credit bureaus for an opted-in credit-builder; Sharing data with third parties to present tailored offers; Training internal models on de-identified aggregated data; Retaining linked-account data for up to 24 months; Allo...

matrix Sets data policy defaults and consent UX based on specific tolerances for data use and retention.
Which authentication methods would you be willing to use for sign-in and sensitive actions? Select all that apply: Passkey (device-based); Hardware security key (e.g., YubiKey); Authenticator app (TOTP); SMS codes; Email links; Biometric on device (Face ID/Touch ID); Backup recovery codes.

multi select Informs security roadmap and default MFA choices balancing usability and protection.
If linked accounts occasionally break or require reauthentication, after how many consecutive days of sync failure would you consider disconnecting or switching apps? Enter a number of days.

numeric Quantifies reliability tolerance to set connector SLAs and trigger proactive support thresholds.

These questions quantify priorities, permissions, monetization tolerance, data comfort, authentication adoption, and reliability thresholds to operationalize a trust-first product strategy.

Study Overview Updated Jan 20, 2026

News & Media

Source	Weight

MoneyLion - Personal Finance App Reactions

Danielle Urquidez

Ashley Mcgee

Robert Reyes

Clayton Oconnor

Deangelo Reed

Richard Womack

Danielle Urquidez

Ashley Mcgee

Robert Reyes

Clayton Oconnor

Deangelo Reed

Richard Womack

Sex / Gender

Race / Ethnicity

Locale (Top)

Occupations (Top)

Summary

Themes

Outliers

Overview

Key Segments

Shared Mindsets

Divergences

Overview

Quick Wins (next 2–4 weeks)

Initiatives (30–90 days)

KPIs to Track

Risks & Mitigations

Timeline

Objective and Context

What Builds Trust (Cross‑Question Learnings)

Persona Correlations and Nuances

Recommendations

Risks and Mitigations

Next Steps and Measurement

Distinct Market Research Groups

Marketing Reports Generated

Digital Twin Synthetic Personas

Questions Answered