Fintech chooses navy blue to look trustworthy, and that is the trap.

There is a design decision that most new fintech companies make almost immediately, and often without questioning it. They choose navy blue. Or dark purple. Sometimes metallic blue. The reasoning sounds very logical: this is the color of banks, of stability, of trust. If we look like them, customers will feel safer handing over their money to us. The problem is: when everyone thinks this way, the result is an industry where you see yourself everywhere.

The “trust blue” trap and the story of disappearing

In English, this phenomenon is called the “trust blue trap.” The mechanism is fairly simple: an industry forms a visual convention based on its most respected leaders, then newcomers copy that convention to borrow some of their credibility. At first, this has its own logic. But once enough people follow, the color loses its ability to convey meaning. It no longer says “we are trustworthy,” it only says “we are here too.”

Jenni Romaniuk from the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute defines distinctive brand assets in two dimensions: level of popularity (fame, meaning how many customers associate it with your brand) and level of uniqueness (uniqueness, meaning how many customers associate it only with you). When the entire fintech industry uses the same color in the same way, the level of uniqueness for all approaches zero. The level of popularity may still be high for that color in general, but no one owns it.

Trust does not come from color.

The key point that many fintech branders overlook is: customers do not trust a financial app because it is navy blue. They trust it because they see valid operating licenses. Because they read real reviews from real people. Because they experience a product that works as promised, consistently, without exception. Color is just the first layer that the eye looks at, and it cannot bear the entire structure of trust alone.

A brand is not a logo. A brand is the gut feeling customers have about you.

Marty Neumeier, The Brand Gap

The Edelman Trust Barometer 2025 recorded the finance industry with a trust score of 64%, but ranked near the bottom compared to other industries. This figure shows that trust in finance is not a default, nor something that can be borrowed by simply wearing the right color. It must be earned, and the mechanism for earning it does not lie in the color palette.

Escaping does not mean being reckless.

This is the right question but asked in the wrong place. What matters is whether the entire system of visual and behavioral signals is consistent and trustworthy.

Nubank is the most frequently cited example in this case. Nubank chose purple simply because it was a color that no one owned in the Latin American finance industry when they launched, and it was not meant to be mischievous. That decision, combined with transparent product experience and clear communication, created a distinctive brand asset. Today, that purple is almost synonymous with Nubank in the minds of Brazilian users.

In Vietnam, in its 2024 rebrand, MoMo chose to draw on banknote patterns and designed its own typeface named “MoMo Trust.” This is an approach that builds on cultural identity rather than copying international visual conventions. The result is a brand identity more closely tied to the context of Vietnamese users, and harder to copy.

Build trust layer by layer.

Trust in finance is built in layers, not from a single signal. The first layer is legitimacy: a State Bank of Vietnam license, minimum capital that meets regulatory requirements, and legal information displayed clearly rather than hidden in a tiny footer. The second layer is social proof: real user numbers, verifiable reviews, and specific user stories rather than vague ones. The third layer is a consistent experience: every transaction, every push notification and every confirmation email carries the same voice and the same level of precision. The fourth layer accumulates the slowest but lasts the longest: the relationship. Customers trust you because they have stayed long enough to see that you don't change.

Brand design plays a role in all four layers, not just in the logo or colors. The real question is: are all the touchpoints where customers interact with the product, from the onboarding screen to error messages, telling the same story?

Questions to ask before choosing the primary color

Before deciding on a color palette, there are some questions that should be answered first:

• If you removed the brand name from the app, would customers know who it is?
• Can the colors, shapes, and fonts you are using be copied by competitors within a week?
• What part of your visual identity cannot be bought but must be built?
• Is the way you communicate about risks, fees, and terms creating a difference?

Byron Sharp and the Ehrenberg-Bass Institute argue that the goal of a brand is to be easily recognizable at the moment a customer needs to buy, rather than being different in a philosophical sense. For fintech, that context is the moment a customer needs to transfer money, needs to borrow, needs to invest. At that moment, what comes to their mind first? And what comes to mind for what reason?

In summary: choosing navy blue is not technically wrong. The mistake lies in believing that the color alone builds trust. Trust is the result of consistent behavior repeated long enough. Color, typography, and shape are merely tools that help customers recognize you when that behavior occurs. They help customers know that this time it is still you, as trustworthy as every previous time. That is the whole job.