Refactoring User Experience : A Tale of Two Indian Payments Apps

Introduction:

In a recent blog article about my growth objectives, I listed my top five 2025 goals. The reading of a development book was one of them. I have been reading a great book by Stephanie Stimac called Design for Developers in order to achieve this goal. Certain revelations in this book have forced me to consider important shifts in the field of user interface development, particularly in relation to how minor UI changes can drastically improve the user experience and promote better use, especially for users with different accessibility requirements. Taking into account the experiences of people with low vision or impaired vision in this context highlights the differences between two well-known Indian-made apps, Paytm and PhonePe.

Comparison: PhonePe vs Paytm

PhonePe has demonstrated prioritising design elements that cater to a wider range of users, including those with visual impairments. Their UI extends beyond mere feature accessibility to encompass visual clarity. For individuals with low vision, the size of fonts and use of icons has a useful impact. PhonePe’s consistent use of larger, clearer fonts across its interface significantly enhances readability, reducing strain and making navigation easier. In stark contrast, Paytm’s tendency to employ smaller fonts in various sections can present a considerable barrier for users with impaired eyesight, requiring them to strain or zoom frequently.

Colour contrast is another crucial aspect of accessible design. PhonePe generally maintains a good level of contrast between text and background elements, ensuring that information is easily available. This thoughtful colour palette aids users with low vision in distinguishing important details. While Paytm has also evolved its visual design, instances of insufficient colour contrast can still be found, potentially hindering readability for the visually impaired.

The design and labelling of icons also play a vital role in accessibility. PhonePe utilises clear, distinct icons paired with descriptive labels, allowing users with low vision to understand the functionality of each element without ambiguity. This reduces cognitive load and promotes ease of use. Paytm’s icon design, while generally functional, sometimes lacks the same level of clarity or consistent labelling, which can be less intuitive for individuals with visual challenges.

My mom uses PhonePe over Paytm because she has low sight. She can’t read anything without her glasses. She is very familiar with the app flow and the icons and text of the PhonePe UI. She uses it very often without wearing any glasses in daily transactions. Due to the UI of PhonePe, she does not depend on others for transferring money to others or recharging bills. She does it with ease, while I always scold her to wear glasses so that she can’t increase the point.

Furthermore, PhonePe’s simple and streamlined navigation structure proves particularly beneficial for users with impaired vision. The clear bottom navigation bar and well-organised menus minimise the need for complex scanning and make it easier to locate desired features quickly. Paytm’s more intricate navigation, with its multiple layers and smaller touch targets, can be more challenging and time-consuming for users with visual impairments to navigate accurately.

The uncluttered and well-spaced layout of PhonePe’s screens also contributes significantly to its accessibility. By avoiding excessive information density and providing ample white space. PhonePe makes it easier for users with low vision to focus on the essential elements and avoid visual fatigue. Paytm’s interface, at times feeling more crowded, can overwhelm users with visual impairments, making it harder to discern key information and interact effectively.

Due to this clear emphasis on visual clarity and accessibility in its UI design, PhonePe stands out as a more user-friendly option for individuals with impaired eyesight. Where Paytm’s design choices may inadvertently create obstacles for these users, PhonePe’s thoughtful approach empowers them to navigate and utilise the app with greater ease and independence. This commitment to inclusive design has undoubtedly contributed to PhonePe’s success and positions it as a clear winner in providing a better experience for a wider spectrum of users.

Conclusion:

The comparison between Paytm and PhonePe highlights the critical role of accessible design principles in creating truly user-centric applications. PhonePe’s deliberate focus on font size, colour contrast, clear iconography, simplified navigation, and uncluttered layout demonstrates a commitment to inclusivity that directly benefits users with impaired eyesight. This thoughtful approach not only enhances usability for this significant user segment but also contributes to a more accessible and user-friendly interface, underscores the importance of prioritising inclusivity in UI development, and ultimately leads to greater user satisfaction and broader adoption. The case of these two apps serves as a powerful reminder that designing for accessibility is not just a a feature, but a fundamental aspect of creating successful and impactful digital products