Finances, Feelings, and Fears: A Deep Dive into the Data
Join us for a deep dive into consumer data on various topics — from the election and the economy to consumer trust and finance brands to feelings and fears about AI and the future of technology in finance. Together, we’ll walk through how consumer perceptions have shifted over the course of the year and discuss what this means for the finance solutions we’re building to serve tomorrow.
Transcript
Hello, welcome.
My name is Leah Hacker.
Thanks for joining me on this on-demand session.
Sorry I missed you guys at MXS. I was tied up
with Hurricane Milton.
But I'm glad that you guys had a great conference
and I'm so excited about chatting with you about the data.
To get us started, let me tell you a little bit about
who I am and what we do.
So this is the Finance, Feelings,
and Fears: A Deep Dive into the Data session.
My name is Leah Hacker, and I am the CEO
and founder of Rebel. Rebel's, a research
and strategy firm that works with finance brands
to help them better understand who their audiences are.
We answer all kinds of questions.
We work with all kinds
of institutions from scrappy FinTech startups
to legacy 100 brands.
And really the questions that we're helping them answer are
critical to their growth strategy.
So things like where do we differentiate in a
crowded marketplace?
What does our customer expect from our brand,
from the products that we put out?
And how should we prioritize our product roadmap?
So identifying things like pain points
and frustrations, areas of improvement,
or competitive advantages in the space.
Those are all types of questions that we answer
for our conversation today.
We're gonna take a step back from finance in general.
We're very specific and we're gonna talk about behavior.
Part of our work as a research
and strategy firm requires us to answer all kinds
of questions about how we live
and exist in the world today
and what some of the perspectives are around the tools
that we use, the technology around global things
that are happening or really, really kind of focused things
that are happening within our community.
We're interested in feelings and perspectives,
but also how those perspectives turn into behavior
and expectations for brands.
So for our conversation today, we're gonna talk about
specifically about behavior.
Over the course of the year, we've been collecting all kinds
of data on different topics,
and we're gonna walk through that data today.
And then at the end, we're gonna provide some
recommendations for the finance industry specifically,
based on the story that we're telling.
All right, so to get us started, we're gonna start
with the most kind of crunchy of all topics.
We're gonna just dive right in head first
for the 2024 election.
So over the course of the year,
Rebel collects quarterly data on the perspective
of consumers about the economy, how we're doing,
what they're worried about, what are the top of mind
questions that they have, or concerns
how they're feeling about money in general.
And this year, the data took
a very specific turn towards the election.
In fact, what we started
to see was consumers wrapped the conversation around money
and the economy directly around the election itself.
So let's dive in and have this conversation.
One of the things that came through the data
for every single quarter this year up through quarter three,
is that life is expensive.
People are feeling the crunch.
This isn't new information,
but we heard it over and over again.
This particular mom of two, with a household income
of 95K — between trying to
afford daycare, the cost
of groceries feels ridiculous.
And she's finding herself in a dual income home trying to,
trying to make decisions
and choices between long-term planning
and day-to-day maintenance of her life.
The surprises that life often brings doesn’t seem
to help the situation.
And so there was a great deal of frustration.
This is not a singular sentiment.
We've seen this kind
of happen over the course of the quarters.
For the — in terms of —
when we asked individuals
how they're feeling about the economy moving
through the rest of 2024.
So this was Q1 data as well as Q2,
and then we followed up in Q3.
What we found was that for the most part,
Americans are worried. They are skeptical
or reporting a level of skepticism about the U.S. economy
and its stability moving forward through 2024.
But what is interesting here is that while 40% in Q3 report
that they're worried there is a little bit of hope here,
we are seeing Americans continue to report
that while they may be worried,
there's also a level undergirding of hope that's holding out
as they kind of move through the year.
So right at about 28%
of respondents in Q3 reported that they were hopeful.
They were hopeful that things were gonna
start to turn around.
We do know that it's widely reported
that Americans are stressed.
In 2024, the economic pressure seems
to be hitting close to home.
So some of the things that we've heard over the course
of the last three quarters is
that paying monthly bills have been difficult,
high food prices, and then recession.
Interestingly enough, in Q1, recession was a,
top three concern, coming out right at 17%.
We're worried about recession.
We've seen this continually drop
as we move through the year.
That's not so much of a concern,
but those high food prices continue to move forward.
It's top of mind for individuals.
And in fact, for Q3, this was the biggest pressure
that Americans reported that they were facing.
In 2024,
we asked some questions
around their confidence in the ability for
the U.S. government to — their ability
or competency, if you will,
to manage the current economy.
What we found was this level
of confidence had a relationship with,
at the very least, their level of hope or worry
or skepticism as they started
to move forward throughout the year.
But it looks like we're kind of cut right down the middle.
So nearly half of American adults reported
that they have zero trust whatsoever
that anybody's driving our economic bus, so to speak.
While the other half of Americans are holding out hope
that it's at least somewhat under control, they have,
there's a little bit of confidence that we're starting
to move towards, the move in a direction
that feels manageable for American homes.
This could be a number of reasons.
It could have something to do with the way that
feds have rolled out
or not rolled out, interest cuts.
It could have something to do
with their own personal budget.
At any rate, we know that
as we've tracked this over the year, over the course
of the year, we've seen this fluctuate,
but stay pretty, pretty right down the middle.
Half of us have zero trust,
and half of us are at least holding out hope.
When it comes to the election itself, we all know
that this has been a really tight race.
We also all know
that the economy has been an ongoing area of focus.
We've seen this swap from Biden stepping out
and Kamala Harris stepping in.
And although these numbers continue
and will continue to fluctuate up until
voting day, we are seeing that the reason,
interestingly enough, the reason why people are reporting,
who they're voting for, seems to be really tied to
a set of conviction.
Either nearly a quarter of folks made their decision,
their voting decision on the sole purpose
of keeping the other candidate out of the White House.
And we have some really strong opinions
about why they are voting for their candidate,
whether it's they believe it's a
they are a great candidate, or they're just not sure,
but maybe they're the best.
When it comes to the economy itself,
the economy continues to play a critical
role in their choice of who they vote for as president.
In Q3, we saw this match exactly
for Q2 of 58%
that the economy is a kitchen table topic
and critically influences who they're voting for
for president
within the election.
We've got a lot of noise this year.
So we do know that the media
is loudly broadcasting.
There's a lot of opinions between social media,
the news, news cycle, as well
as opinions and thought leadership that are available to us.
We were curious to see
how Americans are measuring their trustworthiness in
the media specifically.
And what we found was that across different age groups,
generally, folks believed
that the media was not trustworthy.
In general. We left the definition
of media in this particular question, pretty general
on purpose, but the Gen X
and boomer population, nearly 50% deemed
that the media was not trustworthy.
Moving into
where individuals collect their most trustworthy news
or information in general, typically,
the news outlets are deemed most trustworthy.
What is interesting was that for the millennial population
as well as Gen Z, social media was relied on
as the most trustworthy news or information,
or at the very least, counted as trustworthy.
All right, moving right into trust and consumers.
The topic of media trust, we kind
of moved right into the second data set.
And this one comes, this is a topic
that we see brands grappling with quite a bit.
We like to believe that building trust in general,
as a brand or as a tech, as within technology,
requires some level of, it's a little bit nebulous
or ambiguous.
How do we find it? How do we keep it,
how do we inspire trust in our brand,
especially when it comes to money?
These are really big questions.
And we asked really big questions to consumers.
So we took, we asked questions
around their trust in general
for brands at a broad, very broad level.
And then we pulled it back
and we had a very specific conversation about trust
and finances,
and people came to the table
with some really kind
of poignant opinions about the finance industry in general.
There was a consensus
that banking institutions have some hurdles when it comes
to trust, largely influenced
by the context of the individual.
We graded industries this year, specifically on
how trustworthy they were with zero being
not trustworthy at all,
and a hundred being completely trustworthy.
We then took those industries
and compared them to each other across the segment
of respondents.
Most industries kind of lived in
that middle ground area somewhere between the fifties
and the sixties, seventies, not, there's not one single
industry that rated — that consumers rated as being a hundred,
a hundred trustworthy or a hundred percent trustworthy.
However, when we looked at the different segments
between men and women, what is interesting is finance
for men was counted
as the top 10 most trusted industries according to men,
according to women, this is not the case.
They didn't make the top 10.
Something to think about as we started
to move through the conversation.
So when we start talking about trust itself, when
in the context of the finance industry,
we've gotta pull it back a few steps
and talk about trust within brands itself.
How is it understanding how it's measured
and how it's lost and how it's won?
Like I said, we like to believe
that it's a very specific kind
of nebulous way to earn trust.
Uh, not necessarily true.
When we ask consumers what factors influence their decision
to trust a brand, consistent product quality
and positive past experiences with the brand,
were the top two influence
or factors that influence their decision to trust.
When we see things like this, one of the things that comes
to mind is trust is really deeply old fashioned.
It's rooted in behavior.
So when we see brands who are inconsistent, when we have
previously negative experiences with the brand, just out
of nature itself, human behavior, we struggle to trust
that brand going forward.
It's the same in a person to person relationship, just
as it would be with a brand.
We looked at trust across the different age segments in
general, and for all age segments across the board,
that bad experience was reason enough
to stop trusting the brand regardless of industry.
However, what is interesting here was that Gen Z seems
to be the most,
Discern — particular, maybe would be a good word,
the most particular audience,
because their,
number one reason was split across factors.
While we saw for our boomers in Gen X,
a bad experience in general was enough
to stop trusting the brand, the majority for our Gen Z,
it was a bad experience, a general bad experience
for customer service, for brand reputation
or inconsistent quality that would make a Gen —
that would encourage a Gen Z to step away from a brand.
When we dig into
how individuals are using technology across ages in general,
we start to see their expectations,
just like their expectations of trust start
to differ among generations.
We see the same things start to happen,
how they're using technology.
Again, these were broad questions
with some really key take homes
for the finance industry in general.
AI is all the rage right now.
However, a lot of the feedback that we,
we heard when it came to AI, trusting AI
or understanding how it's,
being implemented in services,
individuals had a conflicting feeling about it.
Not all of them were excited about it.
Some of them described it feeling intrusive.
It was popping up everywhere.
And as this person stated, without rules
or regulation, it just feels risky.
When we look at technology across ages,
just general technology use efficiency,
we could all agree that efficient,
that technology is offered some efficiency.
However, with, the conversations
that we're having with consumers, there seems
to be a growing desire for balance.
So nearly 75% of each age cohort
reported that they actually prefer an in-person interaction
versus technology.
Everybody agreed
that technology generally made their life easier
or made them more productive in their work life.
When we started to get into questions around balance, that's
where we start to see
a little bit of the difference start to pop
among our segments.
There's been a lot of recent reporting lately of the feeling
or of smartphone use in general,
and its impact on mental health.
We see this popping up with
how individuals are describing their tech use.
22% of Gen Zs reported feeling disconnected,
and 19% of millennials reported
that their mental health has suffered
because of their smartphone use.
Again, this is just general tech usage.
This isn't specific
to productive apps or specific work use function.
However, how they are using
or what they are associating with technology seems,
especially for our millennials
and Gen Zs seems to come, to the table with a lot
of anxiety, guilt.
Some people are reporting shame and regret.
When we start to talk about anxiety levels without
phones, when they don't have their phone with them.
43% of millennials report
that they experience anxiety when they don't have
their phone on their body.
The younger generations, both Gen Z
and millennials, seem
to report the most negative outcomes when it comes to
their tech
or smartphone usage with, 26% of millennials
and 24% of Gen Z's reporting feelings of regret
or guilt,
and a direct impact to their mood as well
as their overall mental health.
This isn't new information,
and of course it's not specific to the finance industry
in particular, but their, what is interesting
and why this matters for the finance industry is
that there does seem to be a shift happening in
how younger cultures are
using technology
or maybe even what those expectations mean moving forward.
We know that 42% of Gen Z adults
and millennials express the desire to incorporate
more devices in their life that lack digital capabilities.
So we see them kind of going back more,
swinging back more towards,
or at least having the desire to do so.
Back towards more analog type technologies.
55% of Gen Zs have turned off notifications to assist
with technology overwhelm.
And 41%
of Gen Zs have either taken a break from social media
or completely deleted an app for mental health reasons.
Now, when we step back
and we look at things like notifications,
and we look at things like social media,
those are primary channels for communication for brands.
As we start to see younger cultures step up
and put some boundaries around their tech usage
for other reasons, for reasons outside of the brand,
perhaps mental health
or just to combat overwhelm, these are stats
that are important as we start to think about growth tracks
and developing an out an outward bound,
communication with our audiences.
So what does all this have to do with tech,
with finance specifically?
Well, when it comes to financial services,
having a hybrid service model, a combination
of both those in-service in-person services
and online resource was preferred
to having strictly in-person or strictly online products.
What was interesting was that of course,
the more technology
or the more advanced the service was,
the greater the desire to have access to a person
or a more hybrid model.
So when we looked at things like opening a checking account,
younger generations preferred a hybrid model
where older generations equally
preferred a hybrid model.
But we also saw some individuals that were okay
with either in person or online,
but for the most part, right at the majority
of populations preferred the hybrid service model.
When we looked at AI in particular,
regardless of age, 47% report
that they're only somewhat comfortable
with AI being implemented into the finance industry.
In general, our boomers were the most concerned group.
So 47% are concerned.
However, the majority of us were right at
skeptical ranged anywhere from curious,
skeptical, and concerned.
When it came to excited,
our millennials were the most excited about AI being
implemented into everyday technology.
Interest — Gen Z, not so much
so only 15% of Gen Z reported that they were excited
compared to 18% of Gen Z who were skeptical.
And then 20% were curious
when it comes to the jobs AI can do in finance.
The rule of thumb that emerged from the data set was
that the more complex, nuanced,
or even perceived riskier the financial activity is,
the more uncomfortable users are with AI-driven processes.
So providing budgeting advice,
56% were comfortable
and 44% reported that they were uncomfortable.
Compare this to investment portfolio management,
40% reported that they were comfortable.
60% reported that they were not. Compare this
to guidance on complex financial situations such
as divorce, inheritance, estate planning.
34% reported
that they were comfortable while 66% reported
that they were uncomfortable.
When we asked individuals about their sentiments
around how kinda their thoughts around either talking
with a human or managing their money through AI, really
where they, what they resonated with most,
which statement did they resonate with the most?
So individuals, I have questions about my money
and I want the ability to talk with a human overwhelmingly
across all age groups.
We saw that most people agreed, that's definitely me.
If I have questions about my money, I want the ability
to talk to a human.
We saw this most prominently
among our boomer population.
I wouldn't trust any
of my personal financial information with AI.
We saw nearly 40% of Gen Z
and millennials agreed with
that statement wholeheartedly and nearly half, so 44%
and 45% of Gen Z and boomer or Gen X
and boomers agreed with that.
They also agreed, they don't understand enough about AI
to understand how it would manage those finances.
And perhaps, some of that ambiguity is lending
to some of the resistance.
So 42% of our boomers said, I don't know enough about it
to understand how it would manage
when we start talking about
how AI should be used in finance.
Most folks agree that it should be used
to provide efficiencies,
but not move their money around.
And AI, for some folks,
they agreed that AI was directly related
with how much they choose to trust
or not trust the finance industry in general.
So what are they concerned about when it comes
to AI in the finance industry or implementing AI?
Most of it had to do with their information.
So data breaches, algorithm tampering
or breaches, fraud or inaccurate information
and recommendations overwhelmingly, regardless
of age, the number one concern about AI being implemented
within the finance industry is, data breaches.
How are you going to keep my information safe
and how are we going to continue?
How do I know that my information is safe?
So we've walked through three different data sets.
We've talked at a high level, a little bit about
behavior and sentiments, everything from election to
how individuals are using technology in today's world
and what that use of technology,
how it's informing their behavior.
So things like turning off notifications
or jumping off of
social media sites, apprehension into AI
and the implementation into everyday technology
and how that compares to finance.
So what does this mean for the finance industry with all
of these kind of big contextual data sets?
What does it, what's the take home?
Well, the, some of the cues here, some of the kind
of take home thoughts for the finance industry
to keep in mind is to define the job
that AI is supposed to do.
Individuals were expressive about the fact
that AI is used as a tool for efficiency.
They could agree with efficiency
that technology in general has
provided efficiency into their own personal lives.
And while they may not understand AI in particular,
they could get to a place where it's supposed
to provide efficiencies.
The more personal AI became,
or I guess the more complex the task was,
the more perceived risk it had,
the less likely the individual was
to trust AI being involved in the process.
So from a product standpoint,
and as the finance industry really starts to grapple with
where this technology
goes in their customer journey,
really understanding the tool that AI is doing
is intended to do,
and making sure that there is a concerted effort
to explain that, to make sure that that context is being
provided back to the end consumer where AI is picking up
and where it's dropping off.
So that way the consumer understands the boundaries,
prioritize interaction touchpoint.
So advancement in technology has not replaced the need
for human interaction, in fact,
with a tech-heavy marketplace.
So we've got lots of competitors
that are doubling down on their technology focus
while at the same time we're seeing behavior shifts started
to vary kind of infancy level among younger populations
with the need to go analog
or at least to create some boundaries
in their personal life.
With where tech reaches, this is a really great time
for finance institutions to take a step back and prioritize
or at least understand how they can differentiate by caring
for the customer relationship in a new way.
So things like hybrid service models,
where does technology step in
and where is our human relationship?
Really a differentiator could be advantageous.
Questions for finance institutions
to really start to examine.
Of course, whenever we build anything in order
to build it sustainably, there is value
from building
from real needs, not just ideas.
Right now in the marketplace, we've got lots of different,
voices and lots of kind
of loud advancements that are happening.
But from a finance perspective,
money is deeply emotional.
And as we saw from the dataset, the very first dataset
that we walked through with the election, folks are on edge.
And when we start to talk about money, when we start
to talk about their money in particular,
there's a lot of personal context that comes with that.
Whether they're making a decision to save for retirement
or they're trying to understand how they're going
to meet their day-to-day bills,
or they're having to make a concession between,
do I pay rent this month
or do I put money away for the future?
Those are real questions
and those are real big questions that come
with lots of emotions.
So for finance, the finance industry,
although there is lots of loud advancements
that are happening, taking a step back
and understanding the context behind those things,
and really focused technological
advancement on focusing on those gaps
and those real needs of the customer —
the customer population is critical
as we start to move forward.
And then growth strategies for finance needs to be,
must be focused on a both/and approach.
So we're moving. We had started this a few short years ago.
We started this digital only kind of marketplace.
We started really moving towards the digital transformation
and for the most part,
most organizations started to make that jump.
And now we're starting to see this expectation
of not just a digital only marketplace,
but a seamless integration between how the human
to human interaction is supporting
and working with that digital first component.
So as questions, growth questions are starting
to be mapped out
and a strategy for the next leg of growth is top of mind,
remembering to take a step back
and really focus on the both/and instead of in-person only,
or digital only.
The questions seem to be, the questions seem
to be moving towards a direction of where,
where can we integrate tech
and human interactions seamlessly to provide
really differentiated, really valuable, services
and products back to our customer population.
Alright, so that wraps up
our chat today.
If you have any questions, definitely reach out.
Email is right there on the screen.
And if you are interested in more data,
there's a link on the page, for downloads that takes
each of these data sets that I've walked
through at a much deeper level.
Leah Hacker is the CEO and Founder of Rebel, a research and strategy agency. During her career, Leah has been responsible for crafting user-centered strategy and data-driven scale for startup, fintech, and legacy finance institutions alike. As a researcher, she focused her work on understanding what people expect from the brands they patronize and architecting how brands can deliver on those expectations. She is a published author, with her research work presented in academic journals and industry publications such as Forbes, AdWeek, Business Insider, and Yahoo Finance. She is a frequent speaker, guest lecturer, and angel investor to fast growth and diverse startups, and has worked with brands such as Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Intuit, iDonate, and Qgiv, among others.