UX Design · Banking · Content Design · Mobile

Card Comparison Redesign

Redesigning a credit union’s card comparison page so people can choose the right credit card with confidence, through clear guidance, costs shown in dollars, and a mobile layout built for comparing.

Before

Original page: the comparison chart, three cards over a table of repeated rows

After

Redesigned page: goal picker, three cards and the side-by-side table

Role

Solo: research, UX, visual design, front-end build

Timeline

2 weeks, October–November 2026

Tools

Figma, FigJam, HTML/CSS/JavaScript

Outcome

A coded, responsive page, designed mobile-first

01

The problem

Three cards, no help choosing.

The page never explained the real decision, a lower rate or rewards. On a phone it showed one card at a time, and the FAQ said there was no fee abroad while the table listed 1%.

The original page on desktop and mobile, with three problem areas marked
Before — brand name and details modified for this case study

1Promises guidance, offers none

2One card at a time; first card about 1,100 px down

3Table says 1%. FAQ says no fee.

02

What I found

14

Issues in an audit of the live page, desktop and 390 px mobile

~1,100 px

Down to the first card on mobile, in a carousel with no position dots

Half

Of the comparison rows identical for every card

“I'm scared to get the wrong one.”

The strongest theme in real user quotes

03

Three problems, three fixes

Problem

What I changed

1Can't tell which card fits

A one-tap “What matters most to you?” picker marks the best match, and every card leads with a “Best for” label

2Can't compare on a phone

Cards stack in one scroll with the same structure; the first card now starts about 650 px down

3Costs are confusing and contradict

An estimator shows interest in dollars ($24.46 a month on $2,500), shared terms appear once, and every fee says the same thing everywhere

Goal picker with Lowest rate selected and Platinum marked Best match
① Goal picker with “Best match”
Cost estimator showing interest in dollars per card
③ Cost estimator, in dollars

04

Before and after

Desktop

Before

Original desktop page, hero to the end of the comparison chart

After

Redesigned desktop page, hero to the end of the side-by-side table

Mobile

Mobile before and after at the same height: the first card moves from about 1,100 px to about 650 px down
Both cropped to 1,700 px · dashed grey line = first screen (844 px)

05

Interactions on mobile

Two moments that make the phone layout work: picking a goal jumps straight to the matching card, and dragging the balance shows the cost in dollars.

9:41
Mobile: picking a goal jumps to the matching card
① Pick a goal, jump to your card
9:41
Mobile: dragging the balance updates the monthly interest for each card
③ Drag the balance, see the cost

06

Built for a bank

WCAG 2.2 AA 16 px text 48 px full-width buttons Semantic comparison table Labels never rely on color

APRs stay as variable ranges, estimates are labeled, and nothing promises approval.

07

Next

Test the original and the redesign with five people using the same task, then design prequalification, a membership note and rewards value in the estimator.

Takeaway

The biggest gains came from removing and reordering, not adding.

In banking, accuracy and plain language are design decisions.

Unsolicited concept based on a real credit union's public page. Name and details changed; not affiliated with or endorsed by that organization.

More work