Context
In Transfero, a digital banking app that supports both fiat and crypto transactions, users were unable to increase their transaction limits — either monthly or semi-annual, for deposits or withdrawals — through the app. The only available path was contacting customer support, opening a ticket, and waiting for a manual adjustment.
This bottleneck not only frustrated users in urgent situations but also generated a high volume of recurring support tickets, creating unnecessary operational overhead.
This case documents how I designed and validated a feature that gave users autonomy over their transaction limits — reducing support volume by 72% while improving the overall user experience.
The problem
Over the previous 12 months, the support team received an average of 113 tickets per month related to transaction limit adjustments. These tickets often involved simple, repetitive requests that required manual handling.
Assuming an average cost-per-ticket of $4.70, this resulted in an estimated $6,372 per year spent on this issue alone. Users needed to act fast in moments of financial opportunity — whether to withdraw crypto, invest in a token, or transfer fiat. But the system forced them into a slow, bureaucratic process.
The hypothesis
We believed that by enabling users to adjust their own transaction limits within the app — respecting system constraints — we would:
- Significantly reduce the number of support tickets about transaction limits
- Improve task efficiency (less time, fewer steps)
- Reduce cognitive friction and confusion
- Increase satisfaction and sense of control
The approach
After initial low-fidelity sketches and explorations, we converged on two distinct interaction models to move forward with: one option relied on more steps, involving tabs and toggles that distributed information across screens and reduced visual load; while the second one presented all limit categories on a single screen, with fewer clicks but a higher cognitive load due to increased visual density.
To validate which flow performed better in terms of usability and satisfaction, I decided to run an A/B usability test. This allowed us to measure behavioral metrics such as task completion time, error rates, dead clicks, satisfaction, and ease of navigation across both models.
🅰️ Prototype A — bottom sheet navigation
- Tabs to toggle between fiat/crypto and monthly/semi-annual views
- Clean layout with less information per screen
- Pro: low cognitive load
- Con: requires more interaction (clicks)
🅱️ Prototype B — all-in-one view
- Displays all 8 limit types on one screen
- User taps a card to adjust and confirm
- Pro: fewer clicks, faster flow
- Con: heavier cognitive load due to information density
I lost a crypto investment opportunity because I couldn’t raise my limit in time. I use the app daily and expected more agility from a digital-first product.
M.G., user since 2022
I had to call support and wait for someone to manually fix something I should be able to do myself. That process took a few days.
M.M., weekly user
I still don’t understand why I can’t adjust my own limits. Every time I need it, it’s a pain.
V.T., uses the app for monthly crypto transactions
Sometimes I just give up and wait for the next cycle because it feels like too much work to change a limit. It shouldn’t be this hard.
L.R. frequent user for over a year