How to integrate a curp onboarding api without killing conversion rates?

karen_growth opened this thread · · 1 reply

curp-onboarding-api conversion UX registration

Question

K
karen_growth Asker

We're adding CURP-based identity verification to our mobile app's registration flow and I'm worried about the impact on our conversion funnel. Currently we have a 68% completion rate on sign-up and I don't want the curp onboarding api integration to tank that number.

The challenge is balancing compliance requirements (we MUST verify identity) with user experience (any friction = drop-offs). Here's what I'm trying to figure out:

  • At what point in the flow should the curp onboarding api call happen? Before or after email verification?
  • What's the best UX pattern when the API takes 2-3 seconds to respond? Loading spinner? Skeleton screen? Progress through other steps?
  • How do we handle users who don't know their CURP? Is there a fallback path?
  • What percentage of legitimate users typically fail CURP verification on their first attempt (typos, etc)?
  • Should we let users proceed with a pending verification or block them until verified?

Our target audience is 18-35 year olds in Mexico City and Monterrey. Most are comfortable with technology but have short attention spans for registration flows. The app is a personal finance tracker with budgeting features, so we need identity verification for regulatory reasons but the risk profile is lower than a lending product.

Has anyone A/B tested different curp onboarding api integration patterns and seen the conversion data? I'd love to learn from others' experiments rather than running our own for months.

Answers

O
omar_ux_eng

I've optimized curp onboarding api flows for three different consumer apps. Here's what actually works based on real conversion data:

Timing: Place the CURP step AFTER the user has already invested effort (created username, set password, verified email). Sunk cost psychology keeps them going. In our tests, putting CURP verification as step 3 of 4 performed 12% better than making it step 1.

UX during API call:

  • Show a brief "Verifying your identity..." message with a subtle animation
  • Pre-validate the format client-side before making the API call (catches 90% of typos instantly)
  • If the curp onboarding api responds in under 1 second, show a green checkmark animation. Users love positive feedback
  • If it takes longer, transition to showing "This usually takes a few seconds..." to set expectations
  • Auto-fill name fields from the API response — this feels like magic to users and reinforces that the verification actually did something useful for them

Users who don't know their CURP:

About 15-20% of users in our demographic don't have their CURP memorized. We added a "Don't know your CURP?" link that explains three ways to find it (INE card, birth certificate, RENAPO website). For the truly stuck, we offer a name + DOB + state lookup flow as a fallback. This recovered about 8% of would-be drop-offs.

Error handling tips:

  • Typo rate on first attempt: roughly 7-10% in our data. Always allow retry with a clear error message explaining the format
  • CURP not found: about 2-3% of attempts. Offer manual entry fallback with a "pending verification" status
  • API timeout: under 1% with a good provider. Silently retry once, then fall back to manual entry

Block vs. pending: For your risk profile (finance tracker, not lending), I'd strongly recommend the pending approach. Let users access the app immediately with basic features, and require completed verification only when they try to connect bank accounts or access premium features. This increased our Day 1 retention by 23%.

For providers, look at API Pull — compare response times across curp onboarding api providers. The difference between a 500ms provider and a 3-second one is massive in terms of perceived performance during sign-up.

● Thread open · 1 reply

Find API Providers on apipull.com