[Household Budget Survey] 42.2% of those who continue for over a year are "app users" ── Top burden factor is "category classification" at 41.7%, "simple design" should be chosen

"Household Budget Survey" 300 experienced users surveyed ── "App users" are the largest share (42.2%) among those who continue for over a year.

With the widespread adoption of household budget apps, money management has largely shifted from paper to digital. However, as features increase, many users feel that "they can't keep up with input" or "category classification is too detailed."

In the past, "summarizing at the end of the month with a paper notebook and calculator" was the standard for household budget management, but now, recording methods have diversified, and more people are switching methods in search of ease of continuation.

What methods do people who have been keeping household budget books for a long time choose, and what do they find burdensome?

Therefore, NilCraft Co., Ltd. (https://nilcraft.jp/), which develops and operates the household budget management app "Okozukai-cho Pokemane," conducted an internet survey targeting 300 men and women aged 20-59 nationwide (those who have kept a household budget book in the last 5 years) to clarify their recording methods, continuation status, burdens, and needs for tools.

The results of this survey showed that "smartphone app users" were the most common among those who had continued keeping a household budget book for over a year (42.2%). On the other hand, the number one burden for app users was "detailed classification of expense categories" at 41.7%, which was approximately 1.9 times higher than for manual users (22.1%). This suggests that what is sought is not "a lot of features" but "easy input."

[Main results of this survey]

* Among those who have continued keeping a household budget book for over a year, "smartphone app users" account for the largest share at 42.2% ── surpassing manual (30.8%) and PC spreadsheet software (21.6%). * The number one burden for app users is "detailed classification of expense categories" at 41.7%, approximately 1.9 times higher than for manual users (22.1%). * 59.0% of people would choose an app if they were to start keeping a household budget book now, an increase of approximately 8.7 percentage points from the current app usage rate (50.3%). * The number one condition sought in household budget tools is "only easy input is possible" at 24.0%, indicating a demand for "simplicity" rather than "a lot of features." * 83.4% of app users experience "some kind of burden," with only 16.6% feeling "no particular burden." * Among those who continued for over a year (185 people), app users accounted for the largest share (42.2%). * However, the continuation rates by method differ due to the size of the population: manual 74.0%, app 51.7%.

*For details on the survey method and target audience, please refer to "Survey Implementation Outline" described later.*

Main Survey Results

1. 42.2% of people who continue for over a year are "app users" ── 2nd is "manual users" (30.8%), 3rd is "PC spreadsheet software" (21.6%).

Among 300 people nationwide who have recently kept a household budget book (or pocket money book), 185 people (61.7%) responded that they "continued for over a year/had continued for over a year." The share of each recording method among these continuing users was calculated.

Q1. Share of recording methods among those who continued for over a year ── "Smartphone apps" have the largest share at 42.2%.

"Smartphone apps" accounted for the largest share, with 42.2% (78 people) of those who continued for over a year being app users. This was followed by "manual (notebooks/commercial household budget books)" at 30.8% (57 people), "PC spreadsheet software (Excel/Google Sheets, etc.)" at 21.6% (40 people), and "only automatic linking function of bank/credit card" at 4.9% (9 people).

It is noteworthy that while app users accounted for 50.3% and manual users for 25.7% (a difference of about 2 times) among all household budget book users (300 people), this difference narrowed to 42.2% versus 30.8% among the group of continuing users (185 people), with apps still holding the largest share. This suggests that smartphone apps function as both an "easy entry point" and a "main tool" for long-term household financial management.

2. The number one burden for app users is "detailed classification of expense categories" at 41.7% ── approximately 1.9 times higher than manual users (22.1%), "detail" troubles app users.

We cross-tabulated the moments when users felt "burdened" or "it was hard to continue" while keeping a household budget book, by recording method.

Q2. Top 5 burdens for app users ── 1st "Category classification" 41.7%, approximately 1.9 times higher than manual users.

The top burden for smartphone app users (n=151) was "detailed classification of expense categories (food expenses, daily necessities, etc.)" at 41.7%, which was approximately 1.9 times higher than for manual users (22.1%). This was followed by "the daily input work itself" at 37.1% (manual users 28.6%) and "storage/organization of receipts" at 34.4% (manual users 26.0%). All of the top three items were higher for app users than for manual users.

On the other hand, "I didn't feel any particular burden at all."