Simplifying the
Rejected Loan
Reapply Flow

Context

When users open the app after a rejected application, they land on a specific dashboard state. From there, they were forced to load a standalone module to configure their loan simulation, a disjointed step that sat between two screens with nearly identical intent.

The numbers we regularly monitor using Looker and Google Analytics tell a clear story: once users entered the reapply form, they converted well. But the end-to-end rate, from opening the rejected dashboard to successfully submitting, was significantly lower. Most of the drop-off was happening before users even reached the form. The funnel was leaking at the top, not the bottom.

Problem

The existing flow separated two things users needed to do in sequence: see their rejected status, then configure a new loan. Putting these on separate pages added a page load, a CTA tap, and a context switch, all before the user had even started their reapplication. But the deeper issue was a missed opportunity. Rejected users are a motivated audience: they already wanted a loan. Showing them the loan simulation early, letting them explore the amount, adjust the tenure, and check their estimated installment before committing to anything, could turn hesitation into intent. Instead, the flow buried that experience several steps in, long after many users had already left.

Objective

Increase the conversion rate from:

Open Rejected Dashboard → Successful Reapply Submission

Success criteria, A measurable and statistically significant uplift in end-to-end conversion versus baseline.

Design Exploration

I led the design direction for Variant A by focusing on reducing friction at a critical drop-off point: the rejected state.

The key decision was to integrate the loan simulation directly into the rejected dashboard. Instead of redirecting users to a separate flow, this approach allows users to immediately understand their rejection status while exploring alternative loan configurations, such as adjusting loan amount and tenure within the same screen. The goal was to eliminate unnecessary steps and enable faster recovery from rejection.

This structural change was driven by the hypothesis that users in a rejection state are more likely to reconsider if the path to reapply is immediate, visible, and requires minimal effort.

Beyond the layout, I refined several supporting elements to strengthen the experience:

• Copywriting was adjusted to be more reassuring and action-oriented, reducing the emotional friction associated with rejection.
• Primary CTA was repositioned and reframed to emphasize continuation rather than restart.
• USP highlights were clarified to reinforce product value and rebuild user confidence at this sensitive moment.

Overall, Variant A shifts the experience from a dead-end rejection into a guided recovery flow, enabling users to take corrective action with minimal interruption.

To ensure the solution was not only conceptually strong but also effective in practice, the design went through multiple validation cycles. I conducted lightweight usability testing to observe how users interpret the rejection state and interact with the embedded simulation. Early findings showed that users initially overlooked the simulation module and hesitated to take action when the next step was not immediately clear.

These insights informed iterative refinements to the information hierarchy, CTA prominence, and content sequencing, ensuring that key actions, such as adjusting loan parameters and reapplying, remained visible and intuitive.

As a result, the final design improved clarity and reduced hesitation, enabling users to move from rejection to action more confidently.

Experiment

The change was validated through an A/B test using Firebase A/B Testing with a two-proportion Z-test for statistical analysis. Users were split 50/50 between the baseline flow and Variant A.

The implementation in production was monitored very closely via Smartlook to determine whether the solution was well-received and to identify if there was still room for iteration.

Result

The primary metric showed a statistically significant improvement (p = 0.016). Merging the loan simulation into the rejected dashboard, combined with updated copy and CTAs, meaningfully lifted the number of users who completed a reapplication, confirming that reducing the funnel from 5 to 4 pages removed enough friction to change user behavior.

Business Impact & Decision

Based on statistically significant results on the primary metric and positive business impact projections, Variant A was recommended for 100% full rollout.