The Rocket Tech UX lab conducted in-depth interviews with banking app users in Uzbekistan. The study identified four client archetypes and showed that market fragmentation forces the audience to juggle services for basic operations.
Method
Basic payment and P2P transfer tasks in the Uzbekistan market are successfully resolved, with major players like Payme and Uzum sharing the lead. The banking app is becoming the main financial tool, but the user experience is complicated by card incompatibility, uneven terminal coverage, and opaque interfaces.
To understand how different segments perceive payment ecosystems, Rocket Tech researchers surveyed Uzbekistan residents about their daily transfer and payment experiences. Questions covered current use cases, missing features, and barriers stopping them from switching to new products. Based on the interview results, the audience was divided into four archetypes.
Four user archetypes
1. Active users of multiple ecosystems Technically literate clients over 25, working in IT or related fields. Banking apps are their main financial management tool. They critically evaluate UX and open cards in different banks as needed. They rate their satisfaction with payments and transfers at 8/10: needs are met, but they install multiple apps for interest-free windows, cashback, and zero fees.
"Usually, my salary comes to Kaspi — I transfer it to a Visa Uzum card in dollars... I just convert the rest to soums and pay for everything with Uzum," — Konstantin.
Main pain points of this segment: sudden app crashes at the checkout, blocking of local cards (e.g., Ipoteka Bank) abroad, and the inability to pay with local Visa cards from Uzum due to terminal restrictions.
2. Cautious functionalists Mostly women aged 18 to 25 and older. They use 2–3 banking apps for specific tasks. They value stability and trust, and are skeptical of AI and new products. Transfer satisfaction is 7/10. Basic operations work stably; the priority payment scenario is QR codes via trusted services.
"I try to pay for everything through Payme — there are QR codes everywhere, it's more convenient to pay through them," — Asal.
They pay via familiar services, forced to transfer money between cards due to Visa acceptance restrictions.
3. Newcomers A young audience (18–25 years old) just entering the financial ecosystem. Bank choice is often random; clients are open to new things. Transfer satisfaction is 6/10. P2P transfers solve their tasks, but users often stumble over confusing interfaces.
"In Click, I couldn't understand for a long time what to select, from which specific card the payment was needed," — Zhansaya.
Main barriers: lack of prompts when selecting a payment source, dependence on physical plastic (no habit of NFC/QR), and lack of clear onboarding.
4. Frustrated Users who tried new ecosystems (Humans, TBC) but abandoned them due to negative experiences. They prefer to use 1–2 highly specialized tools. Transfer satisfaction is 5/10. They consider terminal coverage sufficient, but trust in services is undermined.
"Click has very high commission percentages, I almost don't use it anymore," — Abduvakhid.
Segment pain points: hidden charges (as in the case of Humans), bugs with loading card data, and high transfer fees.
What this means for banks
The payments sector in Uzbekistan is the most mature in the fintech market. However, client loyalty is primarily driven by benefits (zero fees) and the stability of basic functions.
The main problem for users right now is artificial restrictions from banks when linking cards and uneven terminal coverage of different systems. The winning ecosystem will be the one that provides clients with a seamless P2P transfer and payment experience, eliminating the need to switch between multiple apps right at the checkout.
