Crypto · UX research · 2022
Mycelium Wallet UX Audit: Full research report
A 36-screen heuristic audit of a pioneering Bitcoin wallet, traced back to the reviews that were dragging its Play Store rating.
- Volume of work36unique screens audited
- Volume of work29 → 3factual Play Store reviews traced to three root UX problems
- Qualitative9 → 4top-level tabs in the proposed navigation
- Role
- Senior Product Designer, UX researcher
- Company
- Mycelium Wallet
- Timeline
- 2022
- Team
- Solo research; founders and developers answered questions in batches
- Platform
- Android
- Methods & tools
- Nielsen's 10 heuristics, Material Design guidelines, user journey mapping, mind maps, Play Store review analysis, WCAG contrast checks
Outcome
- Volume of work36 unique screens audited
- Volume of work29 → 3 factual Play Store reviews traced to three root UX problems
- Qualitative9 → 4 top-level tabs in the proposed navigation
Measured outcome in productionQualitative context: process, volume, lab or qualitativeUnder NDA under NDA
60-second brief
The problem
Mycelium, a ten-year-old privacy-first Android wallet, had drifted away from the patterns users learned in every other wallet. Founders forbade analytics and in-app feedback as a security risk, so nobody knew which screens caused the falling Google Play rating.
What I did
- Chose Nielsen's ten heuristics and Material Design guidelines as the criteria, since no metrics were available.
- Mapped the whole app as a mind map and cut the scope to 36 unique screens; wrote problems and recommendations for each.
- Built a user journey map for secondary functions to show which micro-apps had entry points unrelated to them.
- Read every Play Store review, kept the 29 with a factual complaint and traced them to root causes.
Decisions that mattered
- Rename the concepts users misunderstand.
HD account becomes Stealth mode, "contains 3 private keys" becomes "has 3 addresses", "show unspent outputs" becomes "show addresses with balance".
Accounts screen: the terms users misunderstand - Nine top tabs become four at the bottom.
Accounts, Balance with Transactions inside, Media Flow, a Hub for micro-apps and partner links; tap opens, long press selects, as Material prescribes.
Proposed four-tab structure with a Hub - Fix the stuck-transaction story.
Correct the time estimate, warn on a low fee, add a bump-fee action; this one flow generated most of the negative reviews.
A Play Store review about a stuck transaction
Working with engineering and product
- Developers and founders answered questions in batches; the report is ordered so its recommendations precede any new feature work.
- Scores per heuristic (consistency 2/10, aesthetics 1/10, help 2/10, error prevention 7/10) give the team a baseline to re-measure after changes.
Impact
- Volume of work36 unique screens audited
- Volume of work29 → 3 factual Play Store reviews traced to three root UX problems
- Qualitative9 → 4 top-level tabs in the proposed navigation
A 36-screen audit with prioritised recommendations and a proposed navigation model, accepted as the prerequisite for further development.
What I took awayWhen analytics are off the table, reviews plus heuristics still find the three flows that matter.
