Consumers and Mobile Financial Services

Mobile phones have increasingly become tools thatconsumers use for banking, payments, budgeting,and shopping. Given the rapid pace of developmentsin the area of mobile finance, the Federal ReserveBoard began conducting annual surveys of consumers’use of mobile financial services in 2011. The surveyexamines trends in the adoption and use ofmobile banking, payments, and shopping behaviorand how the emergence of mobile financial servicesaffects consumers’ interaction with financialinstitutions.
This report presents findings from the 2014 survey,fielded in December, which focused on consumers’use of mobile technology to access financial servicesand make financial decisions. Where applicable, thefindings from the current survey are also comparedwith the findings from the 2011, 2012, and 2013 surveys.Topics include consumer access to bank servicesusing mobile phones (“mobile banking”), consumerpayment for goods and services using mobile phones(“mobile payments”), and consumer shopping decisionsfacilitated by use of mobile phones. Detailsabout the survey, its methodology, and limitationscan be found in the body of the report and in a methodologicalappendix.
About edocr

edocr & my.edocr are committed to making your documents work harder for you every day! If you build a great profile page, with links to social media and your website, you make our job of helping you so much easier!
Mobile Mobile bank percent Mobile phone Mobile bank user Mobile payment survey
About edocr

Mobile Mobile bank percent Mobile phone Mobile bank user Mobile payment survey
<p>Consumers and Mobile Financial
Services 2015
March 2015
BOARD OF GOVERNOR S O F THE F EDERAL R E S ERV E SY S T EM
Consumers and Mobile Financial
Services 2015
March 2015
BOARD OF GOVERNOR S O F THE F EDERAL R E S ERV E SY S T EM
This and other Federal Reserve Board reports and publications are available online at
www.federalreserve.gov/publications/default.htm.
To order copies of Federal Reserve Board publications offered in print,
see the Board’s Publication Order Form (www.federalreserve.gov/pubs/orderform.pdf)
or contact:
Publications Fulfillment
Mail Stop N-127
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System
Washington, DC 20551
(ph) 202-452-3245
(fax) 202-728-5886
(e-mail) Publications-BOG@frb.gov
Preface
The survey and report were prepared by the Con-
sumer and Community Development Research Sec-
tion of the Federal Reserve Board’s Division of Con-
sumer and Community Affairs (DCCA).
DCCA directs consumer- and community-related
functions performed by the Board, including con-
ducting research on financial services policies and
practices and their implications for consumer finan-
cial stability, community development, and neighbor-
hood stabilization.
DCCA staff members Alexandra Brown, Sam
Dodini, Arturo Gonzalez, Ellen Merry, and Logan
Thomas prepared this report. Valuable comments
and feedback on the design of the survey and draft-
ing of this report were provided by DCCA staff
members Mario Arthur-Bentil, Anna Alvarez Boyd,
David Buchholz, Allen Fishbein, Jeff Larrimore,
Alejandra Lopez-Fernandini, Barbara Robles, and
Jenny Schuetz, as well as by Federal Reserve System
staff members Andrea Brachtesende, Marianne
Crowe, Susan Pandy, and Maximilian D. Schmeiser.
Mention or display of a trademark, proprietary
product, or firm in the report does not constitute an
endorsement or criticism by the Federal Reserve
System and does not imply approval to the exclusion
of other suitable products or firms.
iii
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................. 1
Key Findings .............................................................................................................................. 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 3
Survey Background .................................................................................................................... 3
Consumer Access to Mobile Phones ........................................................................................... 4
Trends in the Utilization of Mobile Banking and Payments ............................................................. 5
Accessing Financial Services ................................................................................................ 9
Mobile Banking ......................................................................................................................... 10
Mobile Payments ...................................................................................................................... 14
Mobile Security ......................................................................................................................... 19
HowMobile Phones Affect Shopping Behavior .......................................................... 23
Interest in Mobile Services ......................................................................................................... 23
In-Store Product Research and Price Comparison ...................................................................... 24
Use of Mobile Phones in Financial Decisionmaking ................................................ 25
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 27
Appendix 1: Technical Appendix on Survey Methodology ..................................... 29
Appendix 2: Survey of Consumers’ Use of Mobile Financial Services
2014—Questionnaire ............................................................................................................ 33
Banking Section ........................................................................................................................ 34
Mobile Banking Users ............................................................................................................... 39
Mobile Payments Users ............................................................................................................. 41
Non-Mobile Banking Users ........................................................................................................ 44
Non-Mobile Payments Users ..................................................................................................... 45
Mobile Financial Services Security Questions ............................................................................. 47
Shopping Behavior Questions ................................................................................................... 49
Financial Management (Saving, Budgeting) Questions ................................................................ 50
Appendix 3: Consumer Responses to Survey Questionnaire .................................. 53
v
Contents
Executive Summary
Mobile phones have increasingly become tools that
consumers use for banking, payments, budgeting,
and shopping. Given the rapid pace of developments
in the area of mobile finance, the Federal Reserve
Board began conducting annual surveys of consum-
ers’ use of mobile financial services in 2011. The sur-
vey examines trends in the adoption and use of
mobile banking, payments, and shopping behavior
and how the emergence of mobile financial services
affects consumers’ interaction with financial
institutions.
This report presents findings from the 2014 survey,
fielded in December, which focused on consumers’
use of mobile technology to access financial services
and make financial decisions. Where applicable, the
findings from the current survey are also compared
with the findings from the 2011, 2012, and 2013 sur-
veys. Topics include consumer access to bank services
using mobile phones (“mobile banking”), consumer
payment for goods and services using mobile phones
(“mobile payments”), and consumer shopping deci-
sions facilitated by use of mobile phones. Details
about the survey, its methodology, and limitations
can be found in the body of the report and in a meth-
odological appendix.
Key Findings
Key findings of the 2014 survey include:
• Mobile phones are in widespread use.
—Eighty-seven percent of the U.S. adult popula-
tion has a mobile phone, consistent with 2013.
—Seventy-one percent of mobile phones are smart-
phones (Internet-enabled), up from 61 percent a
year earlier.
• The ubiquity of mobile phones is changing the way
consumers access financial services.
—Thirty-nine percent of all mobile phone owners
with a bank account have used mobile banking
in the 12 months prior to the survey, up from
33 percent in 2013 and 29 percent in 2012.
—Fifty-two percent of smartphone owners with a
bank account have used mobile banking in the
12 months prior to the survey, up from 51 per-
cent a year earlier.
—Among those mobile phone users with bank
accounts who do not currently use mobile bank-
ing, 11 percent think that they will probably or
definitely use it within the next 12 months, down
from 12 percent a year earlier.
—The most common use of mobile banking is to
check account balances or recent transactions
(94 percent of mobile banking users).
—Among mobile banking users, transferring
money between an individual’s own accounts
(61 percent) and receiving an alert (e.g., a text
message, push notification, or e-mail) from their
bank (57 percent) are the second- and third-most
common uses of mobile banking.
—Fifty-one percent of mobile banking users have
deposited a check using their mobile phone in
the 12 months prior to the survey, up from
38 percent in 2013.
—Among mobile banking users, the frequency of
use has increased slightly, from a median of four
times per month in 2013 to five times per month
in 2014. This frequency was five times per month
in 2012.
—Residents of more rural areas have a lower inci-
dence of mobile banking use than residents of
more urban areas.
• Mobile phones are also changing the way consumers
make payments.
—Twenty-two percent of all mobile phone owners
reported having made a mobile payment in the
12 months prior to the survey, up from 17 per-
cent in 2013 and 15 percent in 2012.
1
—The share of smartphone users who reported
having made a mobile payment in the 12 months
prior to the survey has increased to 28 percent,
up from 24 percent in both 2013 and 2012.
—Among mobile payment users with smartphones,
the most common type of mobile payment was
bill payment through an online system or mobile
app (68 percent, up from 66 percent in 2013).
—Thirty-nine percent of all mobile payment users
with smartphones have made a point-of-sale pay-
ment using their mobile phone in the 12 months
prior to the survey, in line with the 39 percent
reporting such payments in 2013.
—Of mobile payment users with smartphones who
made point-of-sale mobile payments, 31 percent
did so by scanning a barcode or QR code dis-
played on their phone’s screen at check out
(down from 39 percent in 2013), while 22 percent
used an app that did not require tapping their
mobile phone or scanning a barcode (up from
17 percent in 2013).
—Residents of more rural areas have a lower inci-
dence of mobile payments use than residents of
more urban areas.
• A preference for other methods of banking and mak-
ing payments, as well as concerns about security,
continue to be the main impediments to the adoption
of mobile financial services cited by some consumers.
—Of those not using mobile banking, the primary
reason respondents cited was a belief that their
banking needs were being met without the use of
mobile banking (86 percent).
—The primary reason non-mobile payment users
gave for not using mobile payments was that
they believe it is easier to pay with cash or credit/
debit cards (75 percent).
—Concern about the security of the technology
was a common reason given for not using mobile
banking or mobile payments (62 percent and
59 percent, respectively, of non-users).
• Smartphones are changing the way people shop and
make financial decisions.
—Forty-seven percent of smartphone users have
comparison shopped with their phone while at a
retail store, and 33 percent have used their phone
to scan a product’s barcode to find the best price
for the item.
—Of those consumers who used their phones to
comparison shop in a retail store, 69 percent
have changed where they purchased a product as
a result of the information they found.
—Forty-two percent of smartphone users have
used their phone to browse product reviews or
get product information while shopping at a
retail store, and 79 percent of them changed the
item they purchased based on this information.
—Sixty-three percent of mobile banking users have
checked their account balance on their phone
before making a large purchase in the previous
12 months leading up to the survey, and over
half (53 percent) of them decided not to pur-
chase an item as a result of their account balance
or credit limit.
—Twenty-nine percent of all mobile phone users
and 38 percent of smartphone users have used
their phone to track purchases and expenses.
• Mobile phones are prevalent among unbanked and
underbanked consumers.
—The share of consumers who are unbanked is
13 percent, and the share who are underbanked
is 14 percent.
—Sixty-seven percent of the unbanked have access
to a mobile phone, 65 percent of which are
smartphones.
—Ninety percent of the underbanked have access
to a mobile phone, 73 percent of which are
smartphones.
—Forty-eight percent of underbanked consumers
had used mobile banking in the 12 months prior
to the survey.
2
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
Introduction
In 2011, the Federal Reserve Board’s Division of
Consumer and Community Affairs conducted its
first Survey of Consumers’ Use of Mobile Financial
Services. Since that time, the adoption of mobile
financial services has continued to increase, along
with the range of services offered. As part of its
ongoing efforts to monitor developments in the
mobile financial services arena and to gain insights
into consumers’ usage of, and attitudes toward,
mobile financial services, the Board has continued to
conduct the survey annually.1 The fourth survey, con-
ducted in December 2014, included a random sample
of respondents to the previous survey in 2013, as well
as a random sample of new respondents. The sub-
sample of respondents who voluntarily completed
both the 2013 and 2014 waves of the survey allows
for the analysis of changes in behavior over the past
year among these individuals.
Survey Background
The original survey instrument and subsequent waves
of the survey were designed in consultation with a
mobile financial services advisory group made up of
key Federal Reserve System staff with relevant con-
sumer research and payments backgrounds. The
2012, 2013, and 2014 survey samples were all com-
posed of a mix of a randomly selected respondents
to the previous year’s survey and new survey
respondents.
The 2014 survey was again administered by GfK, an
online consumer research company, on behalf of the
Board. The survey was conducted using a sample of
adults ages 18 and over from KnowledgePanel®, a
proprietary, probability-based web panel of more
than 50,000 individuals from randomly sampled
households; the sample was designed to be represen-
tative of the U.S. population. After pretesting, the
data collection for the survey began on December 5,
2014, and concluded on December 21, 2014.
For the results presented in the main body of this
report, the sample was drawn following the method
used for the 2012 and 2013 surveys. As shown in
table 1, e-mails were sent to 2,308 randomly selected
respondents to the 2013 survey and 2,657 randomly
selected respondents from the remaining members of
KnowledgePanel®. The respondents completed the
survey in approximately 12 minutes (median time).
Of the 2,925 respondents, 1,489 had responded to the
2013 survey one year before, while 1,436 were new
survey respondents drawn from the general popula-
tion.2 Further details on the survey methodology are
included in appendix 1.
As with any survey method, Internet panels can be
subject to biases resulting from undercoverage or
nonresponse and, in this case, potential underrepre-
sentation of adults who may be uncomfortable with
technology. Not everyone in the United States has
access to the Internet, and there are demographic
(income, education, age) and geographic (urban and
rural) differences between those who do have access
and those who do not. These concerns are addressed
by GfK providing Internet access to respondents who
1 See the “Consumers and Mobile Financial Services” reports
series for previous years’ survey findings. Results of the 2011,
2012, and 2013 surveys (published in March 2012, 2013, and
2014, respectively) are available at www.federalreserve.gov/
communitydev/mobile_finance_publications.htm.
2 The 2014 survey also included an oversample of respondents
from rural areas. For comparability with prior years of the sur-
vey, the oversample was not used in computing the results in the
main body of this report; therefore, respondents from the over-
sample are not included in table 1. However, selected statistics
based on the oversample are included in box 1. Additional
information on the sample is provided in appendix 1.
Table 1. Key survey response statistics: Main interview
Number
sampled for
main survey
Qualified
completes
Completion
rate
2013 re-interviews
2,308
1,489
64.5%
Fresh cases
2,657
1,436
54.0%
Total primary sample
4,965
2,925
58.9%
3
do not have it in order to include the portion of the
population that does not have Internet access in
KnowledgePanel®, and using sample weights to
ensure that the Internet usage and key demographics
of the sample population matches the adult U.S.
population. See appendix 1 for a more detailed dis-
cussion. While care has been taken to ensure the sur-
vey results are generalizable to the adult U.S. popula-
tion, the usual caveats regarding surveys nevertheless
apply.
The full survey questionnaire is presented in appen-
dix 2 and the responses to all the categorical survey
questions are presented in appendix 3 in the order
that the questions were asked of respondents. Tables
of summary statistics for the respondent demograph-
ics by mobile phone usage are also included as tables
C.66 to C.69. Beginning at table C.70, cross-
tabulations are presented of consumers’ use of
mobile phones, mobile banking, and mobile pay-
ments by age, race, gender, education, and income.
The following sections of this report summarize key
findings from the Federal Reserve Board’s survey of
consumers conducted by GfK, with a focus on how
consumers use mobile phones to conduct their bank-
ing, make payments, enhance information gathering
while shopping, and manage their finances. The num-
bers cited in this report are derived from the Board
survey unless otherwise noted. All data were
weighted to yield estimates for the U.S. adult popula-
tion. Only questions pertaining to these topics are
discussed in the report; however, the complete survey
questionnaire and the results of the entire survey are
summarized in appendix 2 and appendix 3.
Consumer Access to Mobile Phones
As of December 2014, 87 percent of the U.S. popula-
tion ages 18 and above owned or had regular access
to a mobile phone. While the percent of the adult
population with mobile phones has remained con-
stant over the previous two years, an increasing pro-
portion of those own smartphones: this survey’s
71 percent smartphone ownership rate among those
with mobile phones is a substantial increase over the
61 percent rate reported in 2013,3 52 percent rate in
2012, and 44 percent rate in 2011.
Rates of mobile phone usage remain high and consis-
tent across demographic and socioeconomic groups.
The prevalence of mobile phones demonstrates the
extent to which they have become engrained in mod-
ern culture. Mobile phone usage is approximately
91 percent for persons ages 18 to 44, and declines
only slightly to 87 percent for persons ages 45 to 59
and to 80 percent for persons ages 60 and over.
Smartphone adoption is also higher among younger
generations, with the differences being more pro-
nounced among age groups: 84 percent of those ages
18 to 29 and 86 percent of those ages 30 to 44 who
own a mobile phone have a smartphone, while
67 percent of mobile phone owners ages 45 to 59 and
47 percent of mobile phone owners ages 60 and over
have a smartphone.
Mobile phone ownership varies slightly by race and
ethnicity, with non-Hispanic whites, Hispanics, and
non-Hispanic blacks having rates of 88 percent,
85 percent, and 83 percent, respectively. However,
adoption of smartphones varies in a somewhat more
pronounced way: 82 percent of Hispanic mobile
phone users have a smartphone, compared to 68 per-
cent of non-Hispanic whites and 66 percent of non-
Hispanic blacks (table 2).
3 Throughout this report, percentages are calculated as a share of
all those who were asked a question, including those who did
not respond. Results on phone ownership from the Board’s
2013 survey are very similar to those from the Pew Research
Center for that year. In the June 2013 Smartphone Ownership—
2013 Update, the Pew Research Center reported that 91 percent
of U.S. adults owned a mobile phone and 61 percent of adults
with a mobile phone (or 56 percent of adults overall) had a
smartphone. (See http://pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/
2013/PIP_Smartphone_adoption_2013_PDF.pdf.) The 2013
Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Survey of
Unbanked and Underbanked Households provides measures of
mobile and smartphone access at the household level. In 2013,
its estimates showed that 83 percent of households owned or
had regular access to a mobile phone and 67 percent of house-
holds with a mobile phone (or 56 percent of households overall)
had a smartphone. (See www.fdic.gov/householdsurvey/
2013report.pdf.)
Table 2. Smartphone usage by race/ethnicity
Percent, except as noted
Race/ethnicity
Smartphone usage
2011
2012
2013
2014
White, non-Hispanic
41
50
57
68
Black, non-Hispanic
47
54
63
66
Other, non-Hispanic
45
54
76
83
Hispanic
55
60
72
82
2+ races, non-Hispanic
43
59
64
65
Total
44
52
61
71
Number of respondents
2,002
2,291
2,341
2,603
Note: The denominator is all respondents with a mobile phone.
4
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
Mobile phone and smartphone usage does vary with
the level of household income. In households earning
less than $25,000 per year, 74 percent of adults have a
mobile phone of some type, and 53 percent have a
smartphone. Use of both mobile phones and smart-
phones increases with income, reaching 95 percent
and 85 percent, respectively, for adults in households
earning more than $100,000 per year.
The relatively high prevalence of mobile phone and
smartphone use among younger generations, minori-
ties, and those with low levels of income—groups
that are more likely to be unbanked or under-
banked—makes mobile phones a potential platform
for expanding financial access and inclusion.
In 2014, the share of consumers who were unbanked
rose to 13 percent from 10 percent in 2013.4 The
share of consumers who would be described as
underbanked—defined as having a bank account but
also using an alternative financial service such as a
money order, check cashing service, pawn shop loan,
auto title loan, paycheck advance/deposit advance, or
a payday loan—was 14 percent in 2014.5
Among individuals who are unbanked, 67 percent
have access to a mobile phone and 65 percent of
these are smartphones. Smartphone ownership has
been increasing among the unbanked. The share of
the unbanked with access to a mobile phone was
69 percent in 2013 and 59 percent in 2012, approxi-
mately half of which were smartphones.
Among the underbanked, 90 percent have a mobile
phone, 73 percent of which are smartphones. Fur-
ther, 48 percent of the underbanked with mobile
phones reported using mobile banking in the
12 months prior to the survey, while 32 percent
reported making mobile payments.
Trends in the Utilization of
Mobile Banking and Payments
Services that allow consumers to obtain financial
account information and conduct transactions with
their financial institution (“mobile banking”) and
that allow consumers to make payments, transfer
money, or pay for goods and services (“mobile pay-
ments”) have become increasingly prevalent. Over the
past several years, these services have become avail-
able at a broader range of institutions and the types
of services continue to evolve. With increased dis-
semination of technology and a broadening array of
options, consumer adoption of mobile financial ser-
vices has risen. In the 2011 survey, for instance,
22 percent of mobile phone users with bank accounts
and 43 percent of smartphone users with bank
accounts reported that they had used mobile banking
in the previous 12 months.6 These proportions have
increased in each year of the survey. In the 2014 sur-
vey, the prevalence of mobile banking continued to
increase, reaching 39 percent of mobile phone users
with bank accounts and 52 percent of smartphone
users with bank accounts (figure 1).
Use of mobile payments has also increased. In 2011,
12 percent of mobile phone users and 23 percent of
smartphone users reported using mobile payments.
By 2014, usage of mobile payments had increased to
22 percent for mobile phone users and increased to
28 percent for smartphone users. The steady increases
in the adoption rate among all mobile phone users,
but more gradual rise in the adoption rate among
smartphone users, suggest that smartphone adoption
substantially contributed to the increased use of
mobile payments.
A continuing impediment to adoption of either
mobile banking or mobile payments appears to be
consumers’ limited demand for them: many consum-
ers said their needs were already being met without
mobile banking or payments, that they were comfort-
able with non-mobile options, and that they did not
see a clear benefit from using either service. In addi-
tion, around one in five (22 percent) of those with
mobile phones and bank accounts indicated they do
4 In 2011 and 2012, the wording of the bank account question
was “Do you or does your spouse/partner currently have a
checking, savings, or money market account?” In 2013 and
2014, the wording of the bank account question changed
slightly from the prior years to explicitly reference “bank or
credit union” accounts: “Do you or does your spouse/partner
currently have some type of bank or credit union account such
as a checking, savings, or money market account?”
5 Due to changes in the way this question was asked, the 2014 fig-
ures for underbanked households may not be comparable to
results from earlier years. Most notably, relative to the 2013
report, “money order” was added to the list of alternative finan-
cial services used by underbanked households, and “payroll
card” was removed.
6 Here, the figures for mobile banking in the 2011 survey are
expressed as percentages of mobile phone users with bank
accounts. These figures differ slightly from those published in
the 2011 report, which were calculated as a percent of all mobile
phone users. Similarly, other estimates in the text may differ
from the figures presented in appendix 3 or from estimates pub-
lished in earlier reports because a subsample of the respondents
was used for the calculation.
March 2015
5
not know if their bank or credit union offers mobile
banking, which may be consistent with a lack of
interest in these services among a portion of the
population. That said, the share who do not know if
mobile banking is available from their bank
decreased from 28 percent in the 2013 survey, and the
share that said their bank does not offer the service
decreased as well—from 6 percent in 2013 to 4 per-
cent in 2014. These results suggest an increase in
availability and consumer awareness of mobile bank-
ing services.
Concerns about the security of mobile banking and
mobile payment technologies are also frequently
cited as reasons why consumers chose not to adopt
these technologies. Consumers appear to be more
cognizant of the need to protect the personal infor-
mation stored on their phones, as they are increas-
ingly using passwords to protect their smartphones.
The share of smartphone owners who password pro-
tect their phone increased to 69 percent in 2014, from
61 percent in 2013 and 54 percent in 2012.7
7 At least one major mobile phone operating system has changed
its default settings to require users to set a password unless they
opt out. This change in default setting could also increase the
incidence of password protection.
Figure 1. Usage of mobile banking and mobile payments by mobile phone type, 2011–14
Smartphone
All mobile phones
Smartphone
All mobile phones
Mobile banking
Mobile payments
2011
2012
2013
2014
22%
29%
33%
39%
43%
50%
51%
52%
12%
15%
17%
22%
23%
24%
24%
28%
Note: For mobile banking, the results are derived from respondents with bank accounts and mobile phones and all respondents with bank accounts and smartphones, respec-
tively. For mobile payments, the results are derived from respondents with mobile phones and all respondents with smartphones, respectively.
6
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
Box 1. Use of Mobile Financial Services among Rural Respondents
Mobile financial services may offer convenience or
access in different ways to different subpopulations.
One group that could especially benefit from mobile
services is rural residents. Because rural residents
may have to travel longer distances to visit financial
institutions compared to urban consumers, mobile
banking services may be particularly convenient.
However, there are also countervailing factors that
could make usage less likely. To learn more, the
2014 survey included an oversample of residents in
rural areas.
Thirty-three percent of residents in non-metropolitan
(non-metro) areas reported using mobile banking
services in the prior 12 months, compared with
39 percent of respondents in metropolitan (metro)
areas. Similarly, a smaller percentage (17 percent)
of non-metro respondents reported using mobile
payments in the prior 12 months relative to respon-
dents in metro areas (23 percent).
This commonly used metropolitan/non-metropolitan
distinction, however, has some limitations as a way
to identify rural areas. In particular, non-metro areas
include some places that are connected to urban-
ized areas and have a diversity of access to finan-
cial services. To provide an alternate measure of
usage of mobile financial services for rural respon-
dents, the survey results were also analyzed using a
more narrow definition, measuring as “remote areas”
only the respondents who live in small towns and
rural areas with low commuting flows to urban
places.1 Fairly similar patterns persisted using this
definition: 32 percent used mobile banking in remote
rural areas, compared to 39 percent for everyone
else, and 20 percent of those from remote rural
areas used mobile payments, compared to 22 per-
cent of the rest of respondents (figure A).
If, by either measure, rural residents appear to use
mobile financial services at least somewhat less
than those in non-rural areas, why would this be?
Results from this survey point to some combination
of differing technology, access to broadband ser-
vices, services offered by financial institutions, and
consumer awareness of those services.
Non-metro residents are slightly less likely than
metro residents—84 versus 88 percent—to own a
mobile phone, but considerably less likely to own a
smartphone—54 versus 63 percent. They are also
less likely to report near-constant access. When
asked to characterize their Internet access on a
mobile phone through wifi or a wireless network,
57 percent of non-metro respondents described it as
“nearly always available,” compared to 64 percent of
respondents in metro areas (table A).2 This relative
lack of smartphone ownership and constant mobile
Internet access may make use of certain mobile ser-
vices less attractive or perhaps not possible.
When it comes to mobile banking, the supply of ser-
vices also appears to differ. When asked whether
mobile banking was offered by their financial institu-
tion, 65 percent of respondents in non-metro areas
said yes, compared to 75 percent in metro areas
(figure B). A higher share (30 percent) of respon-
dents in non-metro areas also reported not knowing
if mobile banking was offered by their financial insti-
tution, compared to 21 percent in urban areas.
Whether this represents a lack of interest by rural
consumers or simply a lack of awareness, it would
seem that fewer rural residents have access to
(continued on next page)
1 This alternate measure uses Rural-Urban Commuting Area
(RUCA) codes, developed by the Department of Agriculture. The
“Remote areas” correspond to small towns (less than 2,500
people) and rural areas with low urban commuting in RUCA
code categories 7.0, 7.2, 8.0, 8.2, 9.0, 10.0, 10.2, and 10.3.
(See www.ers.usda.gov/data-products/rural-urban-commuting-
area-codes.aspx.) The companion category “Not remote”
includes most portions of metropolitan and micropolitan areas,
as well as small towns and rural areas that have a substantial
secondary commuting flow (30–50 percent) to urban areas. This
narrower definition of rural areas is very similar to a definition
developed by the WWAMI Rural Health Research Center (http://
depts.washington.edu/uwruca/ruca-maps.php). See appendix 1
for additional information on the sampling methods used for the
primary sample and rural oversample included in this analysis.
2 Nearly 1.3 million people in rural areas lacked access to mobile
broadband in 2012, and rural residents generally face greater
challenges with mobile coverage than urban residents. See https
://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-13-34A1.pdf.
Figure A. Mobile banking and mobile payments, by
geography
Not remote
Remote areas
Metro
Non-metro
33%
23%
32%
20%
39%
22%
17%
39%
Used mobile banking  
in past 12 months
Used mobile payments  
in past 12 months
March 2015
7
Box 1. Use of Mobile Financial Services among Rural
Respondents–continued
mobile banking or are aware of available mobile
banking services relative to residents of more urban
areas.
Demographic differences between residents of
metro and non-metro areas also may be a factor in
any observed differences in the use of technology or
the adoption of mobile financial services across
areas.3 In addition, preferences regarding technol-
ogy use may be correlated with residential location
apart from these other demographic factors.
Overall, respondents from non-metro areas are as
likely to be “banked” as metro area respondents—86
versus 87 percent, respectively—but somewhat less
likely to use either mobile banking services or
mobile payments. The lower usages may be associ-
ated with lower availability of or consumers’ knowl-
edge about mobile banking services by their finan-
cial institution, lower levels of smartphone adoption,
and less continuous mobile broadband access. They
could also be attributed to other factors, including
differences between urban and rural residents in
preferences, demographic characteristics, or
demand for these services. These results indicate
that the promise of mobile technology as a way to
bridge some challenges of living in rural areas may
have not yet been fully realized.
3 For example, estimates from the 2013 American Community
Survey show that the median age of the population in non-metro
areas is higher than in metro areas. Mobile banking use is lower
among older consumers, as noted in this report.
Table A. Internet access on mobile phone through wifi or a wireless network (3G, 4G, LTE) is{
Almost always
available
Not always available,
but is available at
convenient locations
Available only at
locations that require
extra effort or planning
to get to
Not available
I do not need access to
the Internet on my
mobile phone
Non-metro
57%
12%
2%
10%
20%
Metro
64%
8%
1%
7%
18%
Remote areas
59%
10%
1%
10%
19%
Not remote
63%
9%
1%
8%
18%
Note: Here and elsewhere in this report, totals may not add to 100 percent due to rounding and question non-response.
Figure B. Bank or credit union offers mobile banking, by geography
Not remote
Remote areas
Metro
Non-metro
65%
5%
30%
75%
4%
21%
62%
6%
33%
74%
4%
21%
Yes
No
Don’t know
8
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
Accessing Financial Services
Survey respondents were given a set of screening
questions that asked if they had access to a bank
account, the Internet, and a mobile phone. They were
further asked about the various ways in which they
access their financial accounts. Of the 87 percent of
American consumers who have a checking, savings,
or money market account, the majority use some
form of technology to interact with their financial
institution.
As shown in figure 2, the most common way of
interacting with a financial institution remains
in-person at a branch, with 87 percent of consumers
who have a bank account reporting that they had vis-
ited a branch and spoken with a teller in the
12 months prior to the survey. The second-most com-
mon means of access in the previous 12 months was
using an automated teller machine (ATM) at 75 per-
cent, followed by online banking at 74 percent.8 One-
third of all consumers with bank accounts used tele-
phone banking, while 35 percent used mobile bank-
ing, up from 30 percent the previous year.9 (For
8 The definition of online banking changed slightly between the
2012 and 2013 surveys. For the 2011 and 2012 surveys the defi-
nition was “Online banking involves checking your account bal-
ance and recent transactions, transferring money, paying bills,
or conducting other related transactions with your bank or
credit card company using the Internet.” For the 2013 and 2014
surveys, the definition was “Online banking involves checking
your account balance and recent transactions, transferring
money, paying bills, or conducting other related transactions
with your bank or credit union using the Internet.”
9 The relative prevalence of channel usage in the Board’s Mobile
Survey is similar to results from the 2013 FDIC Survey of
Unbanked and Underbanked Households. Of the households
with bank accounts that reported accessing their accounts in the
Figure 2. Usage of different means of accessing banking services, 2011–14
Mobile banking2
Online banking1
Telephone banking
ATM
Bank branch
85%
82%
87%
74%
75%
75%
2011
2012
2013
2014
33%
34%
33%
65%
67%
72%
74%
20%
26%
30%
35%
33%
Note: Percentages are of all respondents with a checking, savings, or money market account for each banking channel, regardless of mobile phone ownership or access to the
Internet. Questions about usage of bank branches and ATMs were not included on the 2011 survey.
1. For online banking, respondents who reported that they did not have regular access to the Internet other than that provided by GfK were not asked the online banking ques-
tion in the 2011–2013 surveys. In the 2014 survey, all respondents with bank accounts were asked the question about online banking, which raised the measure for 2014 to
74 percent—2 percentage points higher than if these respondents had been excluded as in prior years.
2. For mobile banking, the percentages here may differ from the incidence rates elsewhere in this report because the latter are computed for those with mobile phones and
bank accounts.
9
additional information on the use of various banking
channels by mobile banking users, see box 2.)
Mobile Banking
The Federal Reserve survey defines mobile banking
as “using a mobile phone to access your bank or
credit union account. This can be done either by
accessing your bank or credit union’s web page
through the web browser on your mobile phone, via
text messaging, or by using an app downloaded to
your mobile phone.”10
Adoption Rates
The adoption of mobile banking has continued to
increase in the past year. When asked about usage in
the previous 12 months, 39 percent of mobile phone
users with a bank account reported that they used
mobile banking, a proportion that has been steadily
climbing (figure 1). Mobile banking among smart-
phone users with a bank account is substantially
higher at 52 percent, up modestly from earlier sur-
veys. The higher incidence of mobile banking adop-
tion among smartphone users suggests that as smart-
phone adoption continues to increase, mobile bank-
ing usage may also increase.
A significant fraction of mobile banking users have
only recently adopted the technology. Although the
majority of mobile banking users reported that they
started using it more than one year ago, 15 percent
reported that they adopted mobile banking in the last
six months, and 12 percent reported that they
adopted mobile banking between six and twelve
months ago. Among those consumers with mobile
phones who do not currently use mobile banking,
11 percent reported that they will “probably” or
“definitely” use mobile banking in the following
12 months.
Although previous surveys suggest that the reported
adoption intentions of the respondents do not per-
fectly reflect subsequent behavior, there is an associa-
tion between the planned use of mobile banking and
subsequent adoption. Using the panel of respondents
to both the 2013 and 2014 Board surveys, it is pos-
sible to compare the reported mobile banking adop-
tion intention over the next 12 months from the 2013
survey to the reported use of mobile banking in the
2014 survey. Of those consumers who reported in
2013 that they would “definitely” or “probably”
adopt mobile banking in the following 12 months,
only 28 percent had, in fact, adopted mobile banking
one year later. Nonetheless, this is a higher propor-
tion than those who said they did not expect their
activity to change. Among those who indicated that
they “probably will not” and “definitely will not”
adopt mobile banking, 15 percent and 2 percent,
respectively, had adopted mobile banking in 2014.
In total, 11 percent of those who reported that they
were not mobile banking users in 2013 reported
being mobile banking users in 2014.11 However,
14 percent of those who were mobile banking users
in 2013 reported that they had not used mobile bank-
ing in 2014.12 Among panel respondents overall,
mobile banking usage increased from 33 percent of
mobile phone users with bank accounts in 2013 to
35 percent in 2014.
For the group of respondents in the 2013 survey who
believed they “definitely” or “probably” would use
mobile banking in the coming year, the most notable
difference between those who actually did adopt
mobile banking by the 2014 survey and those who
did not was that the adopters were more likely to
own a smartphone. Of this likely-to-adopt group,
42 percent with smartphones in 2014 used mobile
banking, while 3 percent with feature phones used
mobile banking. In both the panel and cross-
sectional data, smartphone users were more likely to
engage in mobile banking than non-smartphone
users.
In every year of the survey, older consumers have
consistently been less likely to use mobile banking
previous 12 months, 79 percent used a bank teller; 70 percent
used an ATM/kiosk; 55 percent used online banking; 26 percent
used telephone banking; and 23 percent used mobile banking.
Comparing these FDIC figures to the results from the 2013
Mobile Survey, the relative ranking of the channels is the same
across the two surveys, but the incidence of use is higher in the
Mobile Survey for all channels. The incidence of online banking
and of households with Internet access are notably higher in the
2013 Mobile Survey than in the FDIC survey. This may be due
to differences in the survey methodology. The FDIC survey is
conducted by phone and in person. The Mobile Survey is con-
ducted via an online panel.
10 The definition of mobile banking in the 2011 and 2012 surveys
differed slightly from the definition above. In the earlier surveys,
mobile banking was defined as using “a mobile phone to access
your bank account, credit card account, or other financial
account. This can be done either by accessing your bank’s web
page through the web browser on your mobile phone, via text
messaging, or by using an application downloaded to your
mobile phone.”
11 This group represents 6 percent of panel respondents who were
mobile phone users in both years.
12 This group represents 4 percent of panel respondents who were
mobile phone users in both years.
10
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
than have younger consumers (table 3). For those
with a mobile phone and a bank account, results
from the 2014 survey indicate that mobile banking
use is 60 percent for those in the 18-to-29 age range
and 54 percent for those in the 30-to-44 age group.
By comparison, only 13 percent of individuals ages
60 or older reported having used mobile banking.
Usage has generally increased from year to year for
all age groups.
Consistent with the data from previous surveys,
minorities continue to be more likely to use mobile
Box 2. Channel Use among Mobile Banking Users
Mobile banking can provide convenient access to
some banking services. However, consumers may
still need or want to use other banking channels. For
example, a visit to an automated teller machine
(ATM) or branch may be necessary to withdraw
cash, and visiting a branch or talking with a cus-
tomer service representative may be preferred ways
of resolving a problem. Respondents to the survey
were asked about their use of five banking channels
(branch, ATM, telephone, online banking, and
mobile banking), and the answers provide a fuller
picture of how mobile banking users interact with
their bank or credit union.
Users of mobile banking services generally access
them frequently, but not to the exclusion of other
kinds of bank services. In general, mobile banking
users reported using multiple channels to conduct
banking business: 82 percent reported using four or
five of these channels; only 2 percent used one or
two channels. In the prior 12 months, 95 percent of
mobile banking users also used online banking,
92 percent used an ATM, 85 percent visited a
branch and spoke with a teller, and 36 percent used
telephone banking (table A).
Most mobile banking users (90 percent) reported
accessing mobile banking in the preceding month,
and the median number of uses for those who used
it in that month was five. Similarly, among mobile
banking users who accessed online banking,
97 percent used online banking in the prior month,
and the median number of uses of online banking
was six. The FDIC has noted that many banks have
required their customers to be enrolled in online
banking before they can enroll in mobile banking,
and some mobile banking features, such as setting
up payees for bill payment and enrolling in alerts,
may require an online setup.1 These types of bank
policies would contribute to the high level of online
banking use we observed among mobile banking
users. For mobile banking users who accessed
ATMs and bank branches, the likelihood of having
used those channels in the past month was lower
(85 and 72 percent, respectively), and the median
number of uses was lower as well (three for ATM
and two for branch). These responses suggest that
many mobile banking users use online and mobile
banking quite consistently for their banking needs,
and access other bank channels on a periodic
basis.
In a separate question, respondents were asked to
rank the three main ways they interact with their
bank or credit union. Twenty-one percent of mobile
banking users ranked the mobile channel first—a
lower share than those who chose online banking
(35 percent) or ATM (30 percent), but a higher
share than for the branch (13 percent) or telephone
banking (1 percent).2 Tallying the share of mobile
banking users who ranked each of the channels in
their top three, the ATM channel had the largest
share (80 percent), followed by online banking
(73 percent), mobile banking (60 percent), branch
(56 percent), and telephone banking (17 percent).
Taken together, these estimates indicate that while
mobile banking users are utilizing technological plat-
forms at a high rate and on a consistent basis, they
have also maintained connections to their banks
through the more traditional branch and ATM
channels.
1 For the full FDIC white paper “Assessing the Economic Inclusion
Potential of Mobile Financial Services,” see www.fdic.gov/
consumers/community/mobile/Mobile-Financial-Services.pdf.
2 The 2013 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked
Households reported the primary banking method for house-
holds who used mobile banking and accessed their account in
the last 12 months as follows: online banking (50 percent),
mobile banking (25 percent), ATM/Kiosk (15 percent), bank teller
(7 percent), and telephone banking (2 percent). For the full
report on the survey, see www.economicinclusion.gov/surveys/
2013household/documents/2013_FDIC_Unbanked_HH_Survey_
Report.pdf.
Table A. Channel access among mobile banking users
Percent, except as noted
MB users
who used
channel in
the past
12 months
MB users
who used
channel in
the past
month1
Median
frequency of
channel use
past month2
Mobile banking
100
90
5
Online banking
95
97
6
ATM
92
85
3
Branch/teller
85
72
2
Telephone banking
36
68
2
1 Of those who used channel in the past 12 months.
2 Of those who used channel in the past month.
March 2015
11
banking than non-Hispanic whites. In particular,
Hispanic mobile phone users with bank accounts
show a higher rate of use of mobile banking (53 per-
cent) relative to mobile phone users with bank
accounts overall (39 percent) (table 4).
Among those with a mobile phone and bank
account, mobile banking use is more common for
those with higher levels of education. Usage for those
with a college degree or some college (44 percent) is
greater than for those with a high school degree or
less (29 percent). In addition, mobile banking usage
for those mobile phone users with bank accounts
with household incomes of $40,000 and above
(41 percent) is greater than for those with incomes
below $40,000 (34 percent).
Common Mobile Banking Activities
Among those who reported using mobile banking in
2014, the most common mobile banking activity was
checking financial account balances or transaction
inquiries, with 94 percent of mobile banking users hav-
ing performed this function in the 12 months prior to
the survey (figure 3). This was followed by transfer-
ring money between accounts, performed by 61 per-
cent of users. In addition, 57 percent of mobile bank-
ing users received an alert from their financial institu-
tion through a text message, push notification, or
e-mail. Depositing a check to an account electroni-
cally using a mobile phone camera (known as remote
deposit capture) and making an online bill payment
from a bank account using a mobile phone were the
next most common activities (done by 51 percent and
48 percent of mobile banking users, respectively).
Mobile banking users appear to be using mobile
applications to conduct their banking transactions,
as 71 percent of mobile banking users have installed
their bank’s application on their phones.
Among all mobile banking users, the frequency of
mobile banking use has increased slightly over the
past year. The median reported usage increased from
four times per month in 2013 to five times per month
Table 3. Use of mobile banking in past 12 months by age
Percent, except as noted
Age group
2011
2012
2013
2014
18–29
45
54
63
60
30–44
29
37
43
54
45–59
12
21
25
32
60+
5
10
9
13
Total
22
29
33
39
Number of respondents
1,859
2,180
2,187
2,437
Note: Percentages are of those in each group who have a mobile phone and a
bank account.
Figure 3. Using your mobile phone, have you done each of these in the past 12 months? (Among mobile banking users)
Transferred money from your bank account to another person
Located the closest in-network ATM or branch for your bank
Made a bill payment using your bank’s online banking website or banking app
Deposited a check to your account electronically using your mobile phone camera
Received an alert (e.g., a text message, push notication, or e-mail) from your bank
Transferred money between your bank accounts
Downloaded your bank’s mobile banking app on your mobile phone
Checked an account balance or checked recent transactions
94%
71%
61%
57%
51%
48%
40%
25%
Note: The number of respondents who were mobile banking users was 829.
Table 4. Use of mobile banking in the past 12 months
by race/ethnicity
Percent, except as noted
Race/ethnicity
2011
2012
2013
2014
White, non-Hispanic
19
26
30
34
Black, non-Hispanic
35
39
42
43
Other, non-Hispanic
23
31
35
48
Hispanic
29
36
45
53
2+ races, non-Hispanic
21
36
31
41
Total
22
29
33
39
Number of respondents
1,859
2,180
2,187
2,437
Note: Percentages are of those in each group who have a mobile phone and a
bank account.
12
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
in 2014. Median usage for those with bank accounts
who reported using mobile banking in 2011 and 2012
was also five times per month.
Among mobile bankers, there is variation in how fre-
quently people use mobile banking services, and what
types of activities they engage in. A relatively small
share of mobile bankers (6 percent) indicated that
they had used mobile banking in the previous year
but had not used mobile banking in the previous
month. These low-intensity users have a lower likeli-
hood of engaging in all types of mobile banking
activities, relative to mobile banking users overall.
Like all mobile banking users, the most common
task for low-intensity users is checking account bal-
ances or recent transactions (84 percent). Forty-
three percent of the low-intensity users have down-
loaded their bank’s mobile banking app—a sizeable
share, but lower than the 71 percent of all mobile
banking users who have done so. A greater propor-
tion of low-intensity mobile banking users are non-
Hispanic white (78 percent) compared to all mobile
banking users (62 percent). Further, a greater propor-
tion of low-intensity mobile banking users are ages
45 or older (49 percent), relative to all mobile bank-
ing users (31 percent).
In contrast, high-intensity users—defined here as
mobile banking users who have conducted mobile
banking tasks more than 10 times during the month
prior to the 2014 survey—tend to conduct all mobile
banking tasks at the same or higher rates than the
larger group.13 In particular, high-intensity users
reported making bill payments using their bank’s
online banking website or banking app and transfer-
ring money between their own accounts at higher
rates than all mobile banking users. Overall, high-
intensity users are demographically similar to the
larger group of mobile banking users but include
slightly greater shares of younger and black or His-
panic mobile banking users.
Reasons for Using—or Not
Using—Mobile Banking
Convenience continues to be the most common rea-
son consumers give for adopting mobile banking.
Indeed, 35 percent of consumers indicated that the
convenience was the main reason they started using
mobile banking. Thirty-three percent of consumers
said getting a smartphone was the main reason for
using mobile banking. A further 20 percent of con-
sumers indicated that the timing of their adoption of
mobile banking was driven by their bank starting to
offer the service.
Among those consumers with mobile phones and
bank accounts who do not currently use mobile
banking, several reasons for not using the service pre-
dominated—namely, they believed that their banking
needs were being met without mobile banking
(86 percent), they did not see any reason to use
mobile banking (73 percent), and they were con-
cerned about security (62 percent) (figure 4). The
small size of the mobile phone screen was cited by
39 percent of consumers as the reason they do not
13 For the purposes of this report, “high-intensity” users are iden-
tified as those respondents who have used mobile banking
within the year prior to the 2014 survey and have used mobile
banking more frequently than 75 percent of all mobile banking
users, which corresponds to a frequency greater than 10 times in
the month prior to the 2014 survey. Based on this definition,
high-intensity users represent 22 percent of mobile banking
users in the 2014 survey.
Figure 4. Please tell us if each of the reasons below are why you do not use mobile banking
My bank charges a fee for using mobile banking
I don’t do the banking in my household
It’s too difcult to use mobile banking
I don’t have a smartphone
I don’t trust the technology
The mobile phone screen is too small
I’m concerned about the security of mobile banking
I don’t see any reason to use mobile banking
My banking needs are being met without mobile banking
86%
73%
62%
39%
34%
32%
20%
12%
6%
Note: The number of respondents was 945.
March 2015
13
use mobile banking. This was followed by a lack of
trust in the technology (34 percent) and not having a
smartphone (32 percent) as reasons for not using
mobile banking. Less commonly cited reasons
included the difficulty associated with using mobile
banking (20 percent) and not doing the banking in
the household (12 percent). The incidence of reasons
for not using mobile banking was generally consis-
tent between the 2013 and 2014 surveys. However, in
the 2014 survey, concerns about the security of
mobile banking decreased from 69 percent in 2013.
Also, fewer respondents reported that the small size
of the mobile phone screen (44 percent in 2013) and
not having a smartphone (44 percent in 2013) were
reasons why they had not used mobile banking.
Consumers who expressed concerns about the secu-
rity of mobile banking were asked to specify what
aspect was of greatest concern (figure 5). Some
reported fears of data interception (22 percent),
phone “hacking” (17 percent), and lost or stolen
phones (9 percent). While additional specific con-
cerns were noted by small numbers of respondents,
the most common response was that they were con-
cerned with all of those security risks occurring
(43 percent).
When consumers who do not use mobile banking
were asked what mobile banking activities they
would be interested in performing if their concerns
were addressed, their responses largely mirrored
those of current users. Checking financial account
balances or recent transactions was the most com-
monly cited (32 percent), followed by downloading
their bank’s mobile banking app (21 percent), trans-
ferring money between accounts (20 percent), receiv-
ing alerts from their bank (19 percent), locating the
closest in-network ATM or branch (18 percent),
depositing checks electronically (17 percent), and
making bill payments (15 percent). However, 59 per-
cent of those who do not use mobile banking indi-
cated that they had no interest in performing any
mobile banking activities even if their concerns were
addressed.
Mobile Payments
For purposes of this survey, mobile payments are
defined as “purchases, bill payments, charitable
donations, payments to another person, or any other
payments made using a mobile phone. You can do
this either by accessing a web page through the web
browser on your mobile device, by sending a text
message (SMS), or by using a downloadable app on
your mobile device. The amount of the payment may
be applied to your phone bill (for example, Red Cross
text message donation), charged to your credit card,
deducted from a prepaid card, or withdrawn directly
from your bank account.”
Adoption Rates
Mobile payments continue to be less common than
mobile banking. Based on the responses to the broad
definition of mobile payments listed above, 22 per-
cent of those with access to a mobile phone reported
that they made a mobile payment in the 12 months
prior to the survey, up from 17 percent in 2013,
15 percent in 2012, and 12 percent in 2011. Rates of
mobile payment usage are somewhat higher among
smartphone users. The share of smartphone users
Figure 5. Which one of the following security aspects are you most concerned with?
Other
Malware or viruses being installed on my phone
Companies misusing my personal information
Someone using my phone without permission to access my account
Losing my phone or having my phone stolen
My phone getting hacked
Someone intercepting my data
All of the stated reasons
43%
22%
17%
9%
4%
2%
2%
0%
Note: The number of respondents was 600.
14
Consumers and Mobile Financial Services 2015
who reported having made a mobile payment in the
previous 12 months increased to 28 percent, up from
24 percent in 2013 and 2012, and 23 percent in 2011.
Of current mobile payment users, 16 percent had
started using mobile payments in the prior six
months, while 13 percent began using mobile pay-
ments six to twelve months prior to the survey. A fur-
ther 21 percent reported that they started using
mobile payments in the prior one to two years, and
26 percent reported that they began using mobile
payments more than two years prior to the survey.
Twenty-two percent of users are unable to recall
when they began using mobile payments.
Younger consumers are more likely to make mobile
payments (table 5). Of those with a mobile phone in
2014, 34 percent of individuals ages 18 to 29 and
31 percent of individuals ages 30 to 44 had made
mobile payments. By comparison, only 7 percent of
those ages 60 or over reported making mobile pay-
ments. This pattern of use by age has been evident
across all four years of the survey.
Among those owning a mobile phone, minorities are
more likely to make mobile payments (table 6). In
2014, 34 percent of non-Hispanic blacks with mobile
phones and 32 percent of Hispanics with mobile
phones had made mobile payments, while only
17 percent of non-Hispanic whites reported making
mobile payments. The pattern of minorities making
mobile payments at a higher rate than white, non-
Hispanic consumers has persisted over time.
There is no clear relationship between mobile pay-
ment usage and income or education level among
those who own a mobile phone.
Common Mobile Payment Activities
Focusing only on those smartphone owners who
reported that they had made a mobile payment in the
prior 12 months, the most common mobile payment
activity was paying bills (68 percent), followed by
making online or in-app purchases (54 percent). The
next most common activities reported by mobile pay-
ment users were paying for a product or service at a
store (39 percent) and transferring money directly to
another person in the United States (36 percent).
Receiving money from another person using a mobile
phone (31 percent) and using an app to receive loy-
alty or reward points (30 percent) were also relatively
common activities for mobile payment users with
smartphones. Less common activities were paying for
parking, a taxi, or public transit using a mobile
phone (16 percent), making a payment by text mes-
sage (11 percent), and sending a remittance overseas
(9 percent). (See box 3 for a research note on measur-
ing the use of mobile payments and mobile banking.)
Although using a mobile phone to pay for a retail
purchase at the point-of-sale (POS) is less common
than paying bills or making an online or in-app pur-
chase, it is becoming less rare of an occurrence.
Developments in technology, the entrance of new
market participants, and increased familiarity with
mobile payments may be contributing to this trend.
As noted above, in 2014, 39 percent of all mobile
payments users with smartphones made POS pur-
chases with their mobile phone in the 12 months
prior to the survey—a figure in line with the 39 per-
cent who reported such payments in 2013. However,
among those POS users, less than half (41 percent)
had made a POS payment in the preceding month,
Table 5. Use of mobile payments in the past 12 months
by age
Percent, except as noted
Age group
2011
2012
2013
2014
18–29
20
26
28
34
30–44
16
18
21
31
45–59
8
9
13
16
60+
5
8
7
7
Total
12
15
17
22
Number of respondents
2,002
2,291
2,341
2,603
Note: Percentages are of those in each group who have a mobile phone.
Table 6. Use of mobile payments in the past 12 months
by race/ethnicity
Percent, except as noted
Race/ethnicity
2011
2012
2013
2014
White, non-Hispanic
10
13
12
17
Black, non-Hispanic
14
18
34
34
Other, non-Hispanic
15
17
16
24
Hispanic
20
18
26
32
2+ races, non-Hispanic
9
13
31
23
Total
12
15
17
22
Number of respondents
2,002
2,291
2,341
2,603
Note: Percentages are of those in each group who have a mobile phone.
March 2015
15
and less than a quarter had made more than two
such payments.
Scanning a QR code displayed on a mobile phone is
the most common method that consumers use to
make mobile payments at the point of sale, used by
31 percent of those mobile payment users with
smartphones who had made mobile POS payments.14
While this remains the most common POS mobile
payment, it is a decrease from 39 percent a year ago.
The next most common POS methods were making a
payment using a mobile app that does not require
scanning a barcode or tapping their device (22 per-
cent), and making a payment by waving or tapping
14 A Quick Response (QR) code is a type of barcode that quickly
transfers information to a device when scanned. Some mobile
payment applications use QR codes displayed on the user’s
smartphone screen to communicate the payment credentials to
merchants when scanned at the POS.
Respondents who answered that, using their mobi</p>