The ask
Where does the Charles Schwab research tools experience break down, and what prevents new users from moving from evaluation to investment?
My role
UX Researcher · Usability Analyst · Presenter
Timeline
Spring 2026 · 10 weeks
Skills used in this study — tap to explore
“Users associate 'Research' with passive reading rather than active screening. They looked for stock comparison tools under 'Trade' and 'Products' instead.”
Key finding · Charles Schwab Usability · Spring 2026
Key findings
Users associate "Research" with passive reading: articles, news, commentary. They looked for the Stock Screener and Stock List under "Trade" and "Products." This labeling mismatch means Schwab's highest-value conversion tools are hidden behind a word that signals the wrong mental model entirely.
Most participants incorrectly navigated to Trade or Products before finding Research
Trade and Compare buttons only appear at the bottom of the page, below a long data table. Users who didn't scroll far enough assumed the buttons didn't exist. Those who did find them reported confusion between the filter checkbox and the stock symbol, causing misclicks and task abandonment.
Primary action buttons only visible after significant scroll · Misclicks on stock symbols when selecting filters
The deselection logic required individually unchecking items rather than applying a single-sector filter. Technical column headers had no explanation on hover. Users lost confidence in their criteria and abandoned filtering before completing the task.
Filter deselection logic causes confusion · Technical terms unexplained · Active filters not visually linked to results
Research deliverable
An interactive information architecture comparison tool — built as a prototype-backed deliverable for the Schwab product team.
Open full screen ↗Get your results
Want to know what your condition revealed about how you respond to design mechanics?
No spam. One email with your personalized findings.
Next project
The AI label doesn't hurt the brand. A bad ad does.