, , ,

Is Funding Really a Barrier to Co-Brand Debit?

(New York, NY) Co-brand debit cards continue to gain attention across the payments industry, but questions remain about whether they can achieve notable adoption in a market long dominated by credit. One commonly cited challenge is funding—unlike credit cards, co-brand debit programs require cardholders to actively move or maintain money in an associated account. Auriemma Group’s latest issue of The Payments Report examines how cardholders are funding co-brand debit cards today and finds that concerns about this potential barrier may be overstated.

Auriemma’s data indicates co-brand debit cardholders tend to have an easy time managing their account. From opening (75% easy), funding (75%), and linking to other bank accounts (70%), co-brand debit accounts appear to deliver a low-friction experience. For issuers and brands, this suggests that usability may be less of a challenge than driving initial interest and engagement.

“Cardholders most often link a direct deposit to their co-brand debit account, but transfer-based funding is utilized too,” says Jonathan O’Connor, Senior Manager of Research at Auriemma Group. “And most of those who do not currently hold a co-brand card say they would likely fund it the same way if they acquired one.”

Not only are co-brand debit cardholders funding their accounts, Auriemma’s research found that 43% would maintain a balance of at least $1,000 if their card offered 1% cash back on partner brand purchases, gas, and groceries, and 0.5% cash back on everything else. Additionally, nearly three-quarters would fund that account at least monthly, highlighting that the product could become a competitor to traditional debit.

“Funding co-brand debit accounts may be less of a barrier than expected,” says O’Connor. “Cardholders are not only open to a variety of funding methods, but many indicate a willingness to fund them regularly and keep substantial balances in these accounts. That suggests the bigger challenge for issuers and brands may not be getting money into the account—it may be creating a sustainable rewards proposition strong enough to motivate cardholders to make the account part of their everyday financial lives.”

Drawing on insights from recent issues of The Payments Report, Auriemma Group will be exploring these findings and more in a member-exclusive webinar Rethinking Co‑Brand Cards: Debit’s Emerging Role on June 24 from 2:00–2:45pm EST. The session will examine where co-brand debit fits within today’s payments landscape, why it is gaining momentum, and the key considerations for issuers and brand partners as they evaluate future program strategies.

Members interested in joining should email research@auriemma.group for more information.

Survey Methodology

The Payments Report

This Auriemma Group study was conducted online within the US by an independent field service provider on behalf of Auriemma Group (Auriemma) in April 2026 among 800 adult debit cardholders. The number of interviews completed for both is sufficient to allow for statistical significance testing among sub-groups at the 95% confidence level ±5%, unless otherwise noted. The purpose of the research was not disclosed, nor did respondents know the criteria for qualifying.

/by
, ,

Are Co-Brand Debit Cards Ready for a Second Look?

(New York, NY) Co-brand card programs have long centered around credit, but debit-based offerings are beginning to emerge. Co-brand debit cards represent an opportunity for brands and issuers to maintain engagement when credit approval is not possible, according to Auriemma Group’s latest issue of The Payments Report.

If declined for a co-branded credit card with a 5/2/1 rewards structure, 53% of debit cardholders say they are likely to accept a second-look co-brand debit card offering 1% cash back and $100 sign-up bonus after spending $500 in the first 90 days. In fact, nearly two-thirds of debit cardholders view co-brand debit as a steppingstone to a brand’s credit card and say a positive experience with it would make them more likely to apply for one.

“Brands and issuers have an opportunity to turn a declined credit application into a constructive experience,” says Jonathan O’Connor, Senior Manager of Research at Auriemma Group. “A well-structured debit alternative—backed by a recognized issuer and anchored in upfront incentives—can keep a would-be cardholder in the brand’s ecosystem rather than losing them at the point of rejection.”

Co-brand debit gives brands a path to re-engage customers who might otherwise be lost after a credit denial—meeting them where they already are. Debit cardholders gravitate toward the product for practical reasons: they want to spend money they already have, avoid accumulating interest, and maintain tighter control over their finances. A co-brand debit offer respects those preferences while keeping the customer in the brand’s orbit.

“Co-brand debit cards aren’t a consolation prize—they are a strategic entry point,” says O’Connor. “While the product can find success as a second-look offering, we believe it also has the potential to stand on its own and will continue exploring that in upcoming research.”

Survey Methodology

The Payments Report

This Auriemma Group study was conducted online within the US by an independent field service provider on behalf of Auriemma Group (Auriemma) in October 2025 among 800 adult debit cardholders. The number of interviews completed for both is sufficient to allow for statistical significance testing among sub-groups at the 95% confidence level ±5%, unless otherwise noted. The purpose of the research was not disclosed, nor did respondents know the criteria for qualifying.

/by
, ,

Free Loyalty Programs Get Sign-Ups—Paid Ones Get Spend

(New York, NY) Brand loyalty programs are popular with today’s cardholders, but free and paid offerings serve very different purposes. While free programs drive enrollment, paid programs encourage ongoing engagement, according to a recent issue of Auriemma Group’s Mobile Pay Tracker.

Over 8-in-10 credit cardholders (81%) are currently enrolled in at least one brand loyalty program, but enrollment alone tells only part of the story. Free programs champion enrollment, with 71% in a free program versus 45% in a paid program. Yet when it comes to likelihood of use over the next six months, paid programs dominate—Amazon Prime, Sam’s Club Plus, Walmart+, and Costco Executive Membership top the list of paid programs members plan to use.

The appetite for paid programs extends beyond current members. Over 7-in-10 cardholders say they would join a $50-per-year program offering free shipping, exclusive discounts, early access to sales, and members-only perks. Even 6-in-10 of those not enrolled in any loyalty program say the same. That willingness is grounded in what cardholders already value. Earning rewards on purchases, free or fast shipping, and access to exclusive discounts are the top motivators for joining a loyalty program—table stakes for a well-structured paid program.

Paid programs also move the needle for spending. Half of paid loyalty program enrollees say they spend more with the partner brand since joining, and only slightly fewer non-enrollees believe they would spend more if they did.

“Paid loyalty programs have a genuine engagement advantage over their free counterparts—members are more active, more likely to spend, and more committed to the brand,” says Jaclyn Holmes, Director of Research at Auriemma Group. “But that advantage only materializes when the value proposition is clear. Cardholders are telling us they need to feel confident they’ll use the benefits and that the cost is fair before they’ll commit to a fee.”

What keeps members in a paid program is the same thing that drives them out when it is missing—perceived value. 53% have cancelled a paid loyalty program, most often because the cost no longer felt worth it or because they simply were not using the benefits. Price sensitivity sharpens that dynamic further—62% are likely to enroll at $50 per year versus 52% at $100.

“Getting someone to sign up for a loyalty program is the easy part,” says Holmes. “Keeping them requires making sure the program’s value exceeds its cost.”

Survey Methodology

Mobile Pay Tracker

This Auriemma Group study was conducted online within the US by an independent field service provider on behalf of Auriemma Group (Auriemma) in July 2025 among 2,172 Mobile Pay (i.e., Apple Pay, Google Wallet, Samsung Wallet) eligible adult credit cardholders. The number of interviews completed for both is sufficient to allow for statistical significance testing among sub-groups at the 95% confidence level ±5%, unless otherwise noted. The purpose of the research was not disclosed, nor did respondents know the criteria for qualifying.

 

/by
, ,

Agentic AI Interest Exists, but Hinges on Whether Actions Feel Safe, Optional, and Reversible [Abstract]

Read more
/by
, ,

Premium Annual Fee Cards Must Work Harder to Prove Their Worth

(New York, NY) Premium credit cards continue to evolve, rolling out new perks, lifestyle credits, and expanded travel benefits to justify rising annual fees and attract high-value customers. The Chase Sapphire Reserve is the latest example, introducing refreshed dining and travel credits alongside a $795 annual fee. But do richer perks meaningfully offset higher costs? Auriemma Group’s latest issue of Cardbeat US finds that cardholders hold premium rewards cards to a high standard—and expect the value they deliver to clearly outweigh the price.

Premium annual fee cards remain a niche segment—over 4-in-10 credit cardholders hold an annual fee card, but only 12% carry a premium card priced at $300 or more. Among those who do, expectations climb steeply with the annual fee. Perks and benefits are the leading driver of acquisition, and cardholders expect them to scale with cost. For a card like the Chase Sapphire Reserve, that translates into a substantial value threshold: 25% of annual fee cardholders say it would need to provide $5,000 or more in value to justify its $795 price tag.

“Premium cardholders will pay more, but only when the math works,” says Jonathan O’Connor, Senior Manager of Research at Auriemma Group. “Issuers need to ensure their benefits program delivers multiples of the price tag, not just an incremental enhancement to existing products.”

Auriemma’s research found that 41% of credit cardholders are likely to apply for a card like the Chase Sapphire Reserve. Sign-up bonuses remain the most influential acquisition driver, followed by marketplace multipliers and the overall value of rewards, perks, credits, and memberships. Prestige and exclusivity can also heighten appeal, but the combination of immediate incentives and long-term earning potential ultimately drives adoption.

“A strong premium card program would include a mix of upfront credits and ongoing rewards,” says O’Connor. “Cards that present value both immediately and over time are best positioned to attract applicants, whereas over-indexing on either approach risks narrowing the audience.”

As premium card fees rise, the issuers that will stand out are those that make their value unmistakable. Clear, easy-to-use benefits, paired with rewards that scale meaningfully with spend, will determine which products resonate in an increasingly discerning market. As competition intensifies, premium cards must not only look compelling—they must prove their worth every day.

Survey Methodology

Cardbeat US

This Auriemma Group study was conducted online within the US by an independent field service provider on behalf of Auriemma Group (Auriemma) in September 2025 among 800 adult credit cardholders. The number of interviews completed for both is sufficient to allow for statistical significance testing among sub-groups at the 95% confidence level ±5%, unless otherwise noted. The purpose of the research was not disclosed, nor did respondents know the criteria for qualifying.

/by
© Copyright - Auriemma Group